APPENDIX A: EXISTING TRAILS, BIKEWAYS & WALKWAYS This page intentionally left blank.
APPENDIX A: EXISTING TRAILS, BIKEWAYS, AND WALKWAYS
The Town of Truckee’s location in the Sierra Nevada makes it a beautiful place to live, visit, or work. Some parts of the Town are relatively flat, others have extreme topography. Several natural and manmade water features fall within or just outside of the Town’s limits. The most significant water features are Donner Lake and the Truckee River. Other important water features include Donner Creek, Trout Creek, Prosser Creek, and Prosser Creek Reservoir. Truckee also has significant areas of open space.
Two of the country’s most important transportation corridors bisect Truckee. Interstate 80 extends from the western to eastern Town limits. Important land uses in Town are located on both sides of Interstate 80. Additionally, the Union Pacific Railroad’s Trans Sierra Railroad extends from the southern to eastern Town limits. Limited crossings of both Interstate 80 and the railroad pose a challenge to local transportation in Truckee.
The Town’s terrain, water features, open space, and transportation corridors serve as both opportunities and barriers to trails, bikeways, and walkways. Figure A-1 shows the locations of these opportunities and barriers.
A-1
This page intentionally left blank.
A-2
Figure A-1: Barriers & Opportunities
A-3
This page intentionally left blank
.
A-4
EXISTING TRAILS & BIKEWAYS
LOCAL TRAILS & BIKEWAYS
The existing trail system in Truckee is characterized by a series of informal trails developed through many years of use which lacks cohesiveness and planned connections. Few formal trails exist, limited to the 60 mile trail system owned and maintained by the Tahoe Donner Association, the majority of which is located outside of Town limits, and a portion of the United States Forest Service maintained Commemorative Emigrant Trail. The ongoing development of the approximately 50-mile Donner Lake Rim Trail, the majority of which is also located outside of Town limits, will contribute to the cohesiveness of the Plan and provide critical regional connections.
Truckee has constructed several paved paths, including portions of the Truckee River Legacy Trail, the Pioneer Bike Path, paved trails in Gray’s Crossing, and a paved trail on the north side of Brockway Road.
Truckee implemented its first bike lanes on Donner Pass Road in 1998. Since that time, the Donner Pass Road bike lanes have been extended and bike lanes have been constructed on other roadways, including Glenshire Drive, Northwoods Boulevard, and State Route 267. Bike routes exist on several of Truckee’s low volume, residential streets.
Figure A-2 shows existing trails and bikeways in Truckee. Table A-1 shows the length of existing trails and bikeways by classification.
A-5
TABLE A-1 LENGTH OF EXISTING TRAILS AND BIKEWAYS BY CLASSIFICATION
Classification Mileage
Dirt Trail 13 1
Paved Trail (Class I) 18
Bike Lane (Class II) 382
Bike Route (Class III) 32
Total 101
1 Does not include Tahoe Donner Association trails 2 One-way total of bike lanes Source: Fehr & Peers, 2014
As shown in Table A-1, the Town has just over 100 miles of existing trails and bikeways.
A-6
A-7
This page intentionally left blank
.
A-8
REGIONAL TRAILS & BIKEWAYS
The greater Truckee/North Lake Tahoe region encompasses a large geographic area, a multitude of government jurisdictions and many diverse environmental settings and conditions. The region includes the Placer County lands located south of the Town limits and extending into the northerly portion of the Lake Tahoe basin. The County of Nevada’s jurisdictional boundaries encompass the majority of the Truckee town limits, including Donner Summit to the west; Carpenter Valley, Hobart Mills and Prosser Reservoir to the north; and Boca Reservoir and the Martis Valley (a portion of which is also in Placer County) to the west. Many state and federally owned lands are interspersed throughout both Placer County and Nevada County, most notably those owned and maintained by the United States Forest Service.
A network of informal unpaved trails has developed throughout the Truckee/North Lake Tahoe region, including the Pacific Crest Trail, Commemorative Emigrant Trail, Sawtooth Trail and Tahoe Rim Trail. A smaller network of formal trails exists within the many public lands around the region, including those at several ski resorts. However, these formal trails lack the necessary continuity to provide for effective use. Additional regional recreational trails planned by the United States Forest Servce will contribute to the regional trail system.
There are many popular on-street bikeways that connect Truckee to the North Lake Tahoe region. State Route 89, State Route 267, and Old Highway 40 (Donner Pass Road) are regularly used by bicyclists for recreation and transportations. The connections are critical for facilitating regional travel by bike.
EXISTING WALKWAYS
Walkways in Truckee primarily include sidewalks. In some cases, paved trails are provided in place of sidewalks. Sidewalks are provided on many of the Town’s roadways, including Donner Pass Road, Deerfield Drive, and various roadways in Downtown Truckee or in residential neighborhoods. Paved trails that serve as walkways exist on State Route 89, Brockway Road, Comstock Drive, Pioneer Bike Path, and throughout Gray’s Crossing.
Marked crosswalks are provided at approaches to most signalized intersections and at approaches to some stop-controlled intersections. Uncontrolled marked crosswalks exist at several locations that experience high pedestrian volumes. Many of these uncontrolled marked crosswalks are located on multi- lane roadways. Existing marked crosswalks feature a variety of standard marking patterns and high- visibility (continental) marking patterns.
A-9
Curb ramps, which make crosswalks, sidewalks, and paved trails accessible for wheelchairs, strollers, and bikes, are provided at most intersection corners. However, there are locations in the Town that are missing curb ramps or have existing curb ramps that do not meet current standards. The Town’s Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan addresses funding for new curb ramps and other improvements for people with disabilities.
Figure A-3 shows the locations of existing sidewalks, paved trails, marked crosswalks, and curb ramps.
A-10
A-11
This page intentionally left blank
.
A-12
LAND USE PATTERN
Truckee includes a diversity of land uses. Residential land use consists primarily of single-family detached homes; however, there are several multi-family residential complexes. Commercial land uses range from downtown commercial in Downtown Truckee to neighborhood and regional commercial uses on Donner Pass Road north of Interstate 80. The Town also includes large areas of open space. Figure A-4 shows these existing land use patterns.
Certain activity centers such as schools, commercial centers, municipal buildings, parks, and regional destinations require special emphasis because of their potential to attached bicycling and walking trips. The Trails & Bikeways Master Plan attempts to provide connections to as many of these activity centers as possible. Figure A-5 shows the locations of major bicycle and pedestrian trip generators and attractors.
Currently, Truckee has two elementary schools (Truckee Elementary and Glenshire Elementary), one middle school (Alder Creek Middle School), and one high school (Truckee High School), and few private and alternative schools. Additionally, the Sierra Community College District has a campus in Truckee on College Trail near the Interstate 80/State Route 89 South interchange.
Downtown Truckee has several businesses, including shops, restaurants, and offices. Major commercial centers include Gateway at Donner Pass at the State Route 89/Donner Pass Road intersection (which includes Safeway, Rite Aid, and several other shops and restaurants), Truckee Crossroads at the State Route 89/Deerfield Drive intersection (which includes Save Mart), as well as several other shopping centers on Donner Pass Road and Brockway Road. Truckee has several bike shops which are regular destinations for bicyclists.
Major parks in Truckee include Truckee River Regional Park, Riverview Sports Park, the Truckee Community Recreation Center, and West End Beach Park, and several other smaller or special-purpose parks.
Other major destinations in Truckee include Tahoe Forest Hospital, the Truckee Amtrak Depot, the Truckee Donner Recreation & Parks District Community Center, and Truckee Town Hall.
A-13
MULTIMODAL CONNECTIONS
Tahoe Area Regional Transit (TART) and Truckee Transit are the primary transit providers in Truckee. They offer both fixed-route and demand-responsive service on a total of seven routes. Route operation varies seasonally.
• TART Highway 89 Bus – year-round hourly service between Truckee and Tahoe City
• TART Highway 267 Bus – winter hourly service between Truckee and Crystal Bay
• Truckee Transit Non-Winter – hourly services between the Henness Flat Apartments and West End Beach
• Truckee Transit Winter – hourly service between the Henness Flat Apartments and Boreal Mountain Ski Resort
• Truckee Trolley Summer – hourly service between Truckee Tahoe Airport and West End Beach
• Truckee Trolley Winter Route A – winter hourly service between the Truckee Depot and Sugar Bowl Resort
• Truckee Trolley Winter Route B – winter hourly service between the Truckee Depot and Northstar California
All TART and Truckee Transit buses stop at the Truckee Amtrak Depot in Downtown Truckee, which serves as the multi-model transfer location in Truckee. There, passengers can connect to Amtrak’s California Zephyr that runs between the San Francisco Bay Area and Chicago. One eastbound train and one westbound train stop in Truckee every day.
All TART buses accommodate bicycles on front-mounted racks that hold either two or three bicycles. All bus bike racks are available on a first-come, first-served basis. Bikes are not allowed inside the bus at any time except on the last bus of the day per driver discretion.
Figure A-6 shows existing multimodal connections in Truckee, including existing TART routes, existing Truckee Transit Routes, and the Truckee Amtrak Depot.
A-14
Figure A-4: Existing Land Use Pattern
A-15
This page intentionally left blank
A-16
Figure A-5: Trip Generators & Attractors
A-17
This page intentionally left blank
A-18
A-19
This page intentionally left blank
A-20
A-21
This page intentionally left blank
A-22
Figure A-6: Multimodal Connections
A-23
This page intentionally left blank
.
A-24
SAFETY
Five years of California Highway Patrol (CHP) Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) data for bicyclist-vehicle and pedestrian-vehicle collisions was reviewed to identify collision locations and trends in Truckee. Table A-2 summarizes total, pedestrian-vehicle, and bicyclist-vehicle collisions occurring in Truckee between 2008 and 2012. Figure A-7 shows the locations and severities of bicyclist- vehicle and pedestrian-vehicle collisions.
TABLE A-2 SUMMARY OF PEDESTRIAN-VEHICLE AND BICYCLIST-VEHICLE COLLISIONS 2008-2012
Year Total Collisions Pedestrian-Vehicle Collisions Bicyclist-Vehicle Collisions
Non- Non- Non- Injury Fatal Injury (%) Fatal (%) Injury (%) Fatal (%) Injury Injury (%) Injury (%)
2008 132 51 0 0 3 0 1 4 0
2009 85 45 1 1 1 0 0 4 0
2010 112 36 0 0 2 0 0 2 0
2011 119 37 1 0 2 1 0 6 0
2012 42 28 2 0 2 0 1 2 2
Total 490 197 4 1 (<1%) 10 (5%) 1 (25%) 2 (<1%) 18 (9%) 2 (50%)
Source: California Highway Patrol (CHP) Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS)
Table A-2 shows that pedestrian-vehicle and bicyclist-vehicle collisions account for 14 percent of all injury collisions and 75 percent of all fatal collisions in Truckee. Because pedestrians and bicyclists are particularly vulnerable in collisions with vehicles, infrastructure and programs aimed at reducing pedestrian or bicyclist injuries or fatalities could have a significant effect on reducing the Town’s overall numbers of traffic-related injuries and fatalities.
A-25
This page intentionally left blank.
A-26
Figure A-7: Pedestrian-Vehicle & Bicyclist-Vehicle Collisions 2008-2012
A-27
This page intentionally left blank
.
A-28
SUPPORT FACILITIES FOR BICYCLING
A successful active transportation network requires more than trails, bikeways, and walkways. Facilities that support of the active transportation system such as trailheads and parking areas, restrooms and bicycle racks are necessary to encourage and attract users of the system.
TRAILHEADS
Trailheads without formal parking areas are intended to provide access to individual trail segments and the larger system. Trailheads are often located within very close proximity to residential areas and are easily accessible to nearby residents. If any vehicle parking is available in these areas, it is informal parking on the shoulders of the adjoining roadway or located nearby in existing public parking areas.
TRAILHEADS WITH PARKING AREAS
In Truckee, existing areas utilized for parking, including existing publically-maintained and owned parking areas, often serve as trailheads for the trail and bikeway system. Examples of these areas include:
• West End Beach
• Donner Memorial State Park
• Meadow Park
• Truckee River Regional Park
• Riverview Sports Park
• United States Forest Service, Truckee District Offices
• The east end of East River Street near the bridge across the Truckee River to the Truckee River Legacy Trail
• Legacy Trail trailhead off Glenshire Drive, on west end of Glenshire Subdivision
Additional parking areas are commonly and appropriately utilized throughout the community, although unimproved and informal. Examples of these areas include:
• Negro Canyon
• The east end of South Shore Drive south of Donner Lake
• Alder Creek Road west of State Route 89 where it connects to the Commemorative Emigrant Trail
A-29
• The unpaved areas on either side of the Interstate 80/Overland Trail interchange
• The unpaved areas on either side of the Glenshire Drive bridge over the Truckee River
RESTROOMS
The Town does not currently have any public restrooms specifically intended for trail and bikeway users; however, public restrooms are available at several parks that also serve as trailheads.
BICYCLE PARKING AND CHANGING FACILITIES
Short-term bicycle parking is provided at several locations in Truckee including Downtown, schools, commercial centers, parks, and municipal buildings. However, short-term bicycle parking is missing at many destinations. No long-term bicycle parking currently exists; however, many workers in Truckee may have the option of storing their bikes in their workspaces. Figure A-5 shows confirmed locations of short- term bicycle parking in Truckee. Figures A-5.1 and A-5.2 shows potential locations of short-term or long- term bicycle parking. These locations are generalized, rather than specific and are intended to highlight desirable areas for future bicycle parking. They could be located within private or public properties.
Truckee Town Development Code Section 18.48.090 requires the provision of bicycle racks for non- residential projects and multi-family residential projects with 11 or more dwelling units at a rate of five percent of the number of vehicle parking spaces. The Town Development Code also specifies bicycle parking design and devices; additional guidelines are included in the Trails & Bikeways Master Plan.
The Truckee Public Art Commission and the Tahoe Donner Regional Parks District are currently leading the Art Bike Rack Project, an artist-designed bike rack competition with the goal of supporting and encouraging bicycling in Truckee by providing bike racks that also function as artistic additions to the Town. Bike rack installation is expected in summer 2014.
Showers, lockers, and changing facilities are limited to Truckee’s largest employers and businesses including the Town of Truckee, Tahoe Forest Hospital and Truckee Tahoe Lumber Company. The Town encourages new shower and locker installations with all new development projects. The Town Development Code provides incentives for new development projects which include showers and lockers. Incentives can include a waiver or modification to any development standard, granted only when a reduction in the project-generated vehicle trips can be demonstrated by the project proponent. Although any development standard may be reduced or waived as an incentive, a reduction in the required vehicle parking spaces will be most common due to the direct relationship between the inclusion of shower and locker facilities and vehicle traffic reduction.
A-30
PAST EXPENDITURES ON BICYCLE FACILITIES
The Town of Truckee has funded and constructed several trail, bikeway, and walkway projects in recent years. Additionally, the Town has committed funding to trail, bikeway, and walkway projects that are scheduled for construction in 2014-2016. Table A-3 shows expenditures on trail, bikeway, and walkway projects by the Town over the past five years.
TABLE A-3 EXPENDITURES ON TRAIL, BIKEWAY, AND WALKWAY PROJECTS
Project Limits Status Cost
Glenshire Drive bike lanes Highland Avenue to Berkshire Circle Constructed $2.9 million (Phase 1)
Glenshire Drive bike lanes Donner Pass Road to Highland Avenue Constructed $3.4 million (Phase 2)
Partially Trout Creek Trail Downtown Truckee to Northwoods Boulevard $4.1 million constructed
Riverview Sports Park to Tahoe-Truckee Truckee River Legacy Trail Sanitation Agency (TTSA) Water Reclamation Constructed $1.0 million (Phase 3A) Plant
Truckee River Legacy Trail TTSA Water Reclamation Plant to Glenshire Constructed $4.3 million (Phase 3B)
Brockway Road Trail Martis Valley Road to Truckee River Regional Constructed $1.1 million (Phase 2) Park
Donner Pass Road to US Forest Service Ranger Stockrest Springs Trail Constructed $63,000 Station
Sierra College shared use Donner Pass Road/McIver Crossing Constructed $286,000 path roundabout towards Sierra College
Total $17,149,000
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2014
Table A-3 shows that the Town has expended over $17 million in recent years on trail, bikeway, and walkway projects.
A-31
EXISTING LEVELS OF BICYCLING & WALKING
The American Community Survey (ACS) is one of the only sources of data regarding existing levels of bicycling and walking in Truckee. The 2008-2012 ACS, shown in Table A-4, provides sample data about means of transportation to work. According to the 2008-2012 ACS, one percent of Truckee residents walk to work and less than one percent of Truckee residents bike to work. These figures are for work trips only and do not include trips made for recreational or other utilitarian purposes. Non-work trips, such as shopping or errands, are more likely to be made by walking or bicycling. Therefore, it is reasonable to believe that actual levels of walking and bicycling in Truckee are higher than determined by the ACS. ACS data does not distinguish between intra-jurisdiction and inter-jurisdiction trips; however, it is likely that the bicycle and walking mode shares are higher among individuals who both live and work in Truckee.
TABLE A-4 AMERICAN COMMUNITY SURVEY (ACS) MODE SHARE %, 2008-2012
Number of Mode Percentage Commuters
Bicycle 22 <1%
Walk 130 1%
Car, Truck, Van, or Motorcycle 7,677 89%
Public Transit 0 0%
Worked at Home/Other 844 10%
Total 8,673 100%
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2014
Based on the 2008-2012 ACS data, approximately 150 commuters bicycle or walk as their primary means of transportation to work, representing 300 trips per working day. Each commuter makes two trips each day: one trip from home to work and one trip from work to home.
SAFETY AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS
Bicycling and walking safety and encouragement programs for all ages are important for maximizing the use of active transportation modes.
A-32
Since 1990, the California Highway Patrol (CHP) Truckee Substation has organized safety courses throughout the community promoting roadway and bicycle safety. In cooperation with non-profit community groups, the CHP has also sponsored annual bicycle rodeos in the Truckee and North Lake Tahoe region. The CHP programs are supplemented by routine enforcement and distribution of bicycle safety and law literature produced in cooperation with the American Automobile Association.
Under contract with the Nevada County Sheriff’s Office (NCSO), limited bicycle safety and education programs were offered to the Truckee community. A local bicycle safety and education program was implemented for two years commencing in 1997 under the NCSO Traffic Division, however lapsed due to lack of grant funding supporting this program. A renewed commitment to bicycle safety and education was made an integral component of the Truckee Police Department in 2001. Truckee Police attend various community events to distribute free bike helmets for children and participate in bicycle rodeos at local schools. In addition, free bike helmets for children are distributed at the police station upon request any time during business hours.
The Truckee Donner Parks & Recreation District promotes safe bicycling through safety signage along all district-maintained trails and includes a safety education component within their bicycle maintenance course offered during summer. TDRPD also teaches safe bicycling to children as part of their Adventure Camp program targeting fourth through sixth graders held three to four times per year.
Additional safety and education programs for both bicyclists and/or equestrians are provided through the United States Forest Service-supported Tread Lightly Program, Truckee Junior Horseman, Safe Routes to Schools, Share the Road Program and the International Mountain Bike Association (IMBA). In 2012, the Truckee Pump Park opened to mountain bicyclists with funding and design guidance from IMBA.
The Truckee Trails Foundation (TTF), with grant funding from the Tahoe Truckee Community Foundation, conducts annual “Safe Bike Days” at the local Family Resource Center. The purpose of these events is to provide free bike repairs to lower income families in the Truckee area, some of whom rely almost exclusively on bicycles as a source of transportation. Bicycle mechanics are hired by the Truckee Trails Foundation and fix up to 20 bikes at each event. TTF has also provided free bike helmets to children, along with safe bicycling lessons as they wait for the bikes to be fixed. In 2010, TTF helped to implement programs for Safe Routes to School by developing a curriculum guide for teachers on walking and bicycling safety, sponsoring a bike safety-themed coloring contest, and distributing reflectors for children’s backpacks.
A-33
This page intentionally left blank.
A-34
APPENDIX B: ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN CONFORMITY This page intentionally left blank.
APPENDIX B: ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM CONFORMITY
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Active Transportation Program (ATP) requires the following elements be included in a plan to encourage active modes of transportation
Location in Trails & Bikeways Action Transportation Program Required Element Master Plan
The estimated number of existing bicycle trips and pedestrian trips in the plan area, both in absolute numbers and as a percentage of all trips, and Appendix A, Page A-28 the estimated increase in the number of bicycle trips and pedestrian trips resulting from implementation of the plan.
The number and location of collisions, serious injuries, and fatalities suffered by bicyclists and pedestrians in the plan area, both in absolute Appendix A, Page A-21 numbers and as a percentage of all collisions and injuries, and a goal for collision, serious injury, and fatality reduction after implementation of the plan.
A map and description of existing and proposed land use and settlement patterns which must include, but not be limited to, locations of Appendix A, Page A-13 residential neighborhoods, schools, shopping centers, public buildings, major employment centers, and other destinations.
A map and description of existing and proposed bicycle transportation Page 32 facilities.
A map and description of existing and proposed end-of-trip bicycle Appendix A, Page A-25 parking facilities.
Appendix A, Page A-26 A description of existing and proposed policies related to bicycle parking
in public locations, private parking garages and parking lots and in new commercial and residential developments.
A map and description of existing and proposed bicycle transport and parking facilities for connections with and use of other transportation modes. These must include, but not be limited to, parking facilities at Appendix A, Page A-26 transit stops, rail and transit terminals, ferry docks and landings, park and ride lots, and provisions for transporting bicyclists and bicycles on transit or rail vehicles or ferry vessels.
A map and description of existing and proposed pedestrian facilities at Page 41 major transit hubs. These must include, but are not limited to, rail and transit terminals, and ferry docks and landings.
A description of proposed signage providing wayfinding along bicycle Appendix E and pedestrian networks to designated destinations.
A description of the policies and procedures for maintaining existing and proposed bicycle and pedestrian facilities, including, but not limited to, Chapter 7 the maintenance of smooth pavement, freedom from encroaching vegetation, maintenance of traffic control devices including striping and other pavement markings, and lighting.
A description of bicycle and pedestrian safety, education, and encouragement programs conducted in the area included within the plan, efforts by the law enforcement agency having primary traffic law Appendix A, Page A-28 enforcement responsibility in the area to enforce provisions of the law impacting bicycle and pedestrian safety, and the resulting effect on accidents involving bicyclists and pedestrians.
A description of the extent of community involvement in development of Page 12 the plan, including disadvantaged and underserved communities.
A description of how the active transportation plan has been coordinated with neighboring jurisdictions and is consistent with other local or Page 18 regional transportation, air quality, or energy conservation plans, including, but not limited to, general plans and a Sustainable Community Strategy in a Regional Transportation Plan.
A description of the projects and programs proposed in the plan and a Appendix D listing of their priorities for implementation, including the methodology for project prioritization and a proposed timeline for implementation.
A description of past expenditures for bicycle and pedestrian facilities
Appendix A, Page A-27 and programs, and future financial needs for projects and programs that improve safety and convenience for bicyclists and pedestrians in the plan Page 43 area. Include anticipated revenue sources and potential grant funding for bicycle and pedestrian uses.
A description of steps necessary to implement the plan and the reporting Chapter 6 process that will be used to keep the adopting agency and community informed of the progress being made in implementing the plan.
A resolution showing adoption of the plan by the city, county or district. If the active transportation plan was prepared by a county transportation commission, regional transportation planning agency, MPO, school Appendix G district or transit district, the plan should indicate the support via resolution of the city(s) or county(s) in which the proposed facilities would be located.
This page intentionally left blank. APPENDIX C: SUMMARY OF PUBLIC OUTREACH This page intentionally left blank.
Public Comment Feb 26, 2014 Workshop and Online Survey
Residents preferred off-street bicycle paths, paved and unpaved, by far at 223 responses. 58 people stated a preference for in road bike lanes, while 46 people preferred a shared vehicle lane with automobile traffic. Only 3 people said that they preferred to use the sidewalk to ride a bicycle (Figure 1).
Figure 1: What type of bicycle facility do you prefer?
120 100 114 109 80 60 40 58 46 20 3 Numberof Responses 0 Bike lane in Off-street, Share Sidewalk Unpaved road paved multi- vehicle lane trail use path with automobile traffic
As with bikeways, the most preferred types of walkways supported recreational use. 34 respondents preferred off street bicycling and walking paths; an equal number favored hiking trails. 7 respondents stated a preference for sidewalks (Figure 2).
Figure 2: What type of walkway do you prefer? 40
35 30 34 34 25 20 15 10
Numberof Responses 5 7 0 Off-street bicycling Hiking trail Sidewalk and walking path (paved)
Walking was the most popular activity using Truckee’s trails and bikeways at 115 responses; mountain biking followed closely at 108 responses. Other popular uses of trails and bikeways included road biking, hiking, running, and walking or running with a dog, ranging from 63 to 82 responses (Figure 3).
Figure 3: How do you currently use Truckee’s trails and bikeways, if at all?
Cross-country skiing 40 Hiking 63 Horseback riding 5 Mountain biking 108 Other 15 Road biking 73 Rollerblading 5 Running 62 Skateboarding 6 Snowshoeing 30 Walking 115 Walking or running with dog 82 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Number of Responses
The Truckee community is very active. The majority of people, 40% responded that they use trails a few times a week. 18% of respondents use trails once a week, while 22% of respondents use trails one to two times per month (Figure 4). Since many people are using trails to ride their bikes, not surprisingly, responses for how often people ride their bicycles was very similar to how often one uses the trails. 37% of people rode their bicycle a few times a week (Figure 5).
Figure 4: On average, how often do you use the trails? Never, 2% Daily, 14% 1-2 times per Hardly ever, 5% month, 22%
Once a week, 18% A few times a week, 40%
Figure 5: On average, how often do you ride a bicycle?
Hardly ever Never Daily 10% 1-2 times per 7% 12% month 17%
Once a week A few times a 17% week 37%
Residents had many reasons to ride a bicycle. The most common reasons to ride a bicycle were for recreation and exercise by mountain bike or road bike at 113 and 85 responses respectively (Figure 6).
Figure 6: If you ride a bicycle, why do you ride? 113
120 100 85 80 60 51 40 32 15 20 4 10 8 Numberof Responses 0
The top reason for not walking or biking more often was that there are not enough bicycle lanes or routes at 120 responses (Figure 7). Harsh weather, poor facility condition, and traffic volume and speed were also cited as among the most common reasons preventing respondents from walking or biking more often.
Figure 7: What prevents you from walking or bicycling more often in Truckee?
Destinations are too far apart 51 Difficult route finding 12 Difficult to cross streets 28 Driving is easier than walking or biking 33 Harsh weather 79 Need to transport children or elderly 28 No bike parking 32 No shower or place to change clothes 15 Not enough bike lanes or routes 120 Other 30 Physical exertion 6 poor road, trail or sidewalk condition 82 Sidewalks not connected 49 Sidewalks too narrow 5 Traffic volume and speed 76 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Number of Responses
The top three priorities for new trails, bikeways and walkways were completing the Truckee Legacy Trail, closing a critical gap in the bikeway and walkway system, and access to and protection of open space (Figure 8).
Figure 8: What are your top priorities for new trails, bikeways, and walkways? 30 27 27
25 20 20
15 11 9 10
5 1 1 Numberof Responses 0 0 closing a improving access to improving lower cost access to recreation completing critical gap in safe routes shopping safety projects and the Truckee the bikeway to school and parks protection of River Legacy and walkway open space Trail system
Residents expressed the most interest in seeing funds spent for more bike paths, trails, lanes and routes (47 responses), as well as snow clearing from paths for winter use (21 responses) (Figure 9).
Figure 9: How should money for bikeways and walkways be spent?
40 35 35 30 25 22 21 20 15 10 8 8 8 4 4 3 3 5 0 Number of Responses of Number 0
Adding new bike facilities to directly access key destinations and to close critical gaps were the most popular suggestions to the Town as a way to improve bicycling and walking in Truckee at 128 and 88 responses respectively (Figure 10).
Figure 10: What can the Town do to improve conditions for bicyclists, pedestrians, and other trail users?
Winter grooming for Nordic skiing 47 Maintenance (repaving, filling in potholes, etc.) 60 Snow removal from bike paths for winter use 52 Safety improvement 49 Other 23 Install wayfinding signage 20 Install bike parking 37 Enforcement 25 Encouragement 39 Education for motorists and bicyclists/pedestrians 24 Add a bikeway or walkway to other key destinations 88 Add a bikeway or walkway to school 32 Add a bikeway or walkway to close a critical gap 128 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Number of Responses
Table 1: Top twelve locations in Truckee where it is difficult to walk or ride a bicycle Number of Ranking Segment Description Responses 1 Glenshire Dr from Donner Pass Road to Dorchester Dr loop 54 2 Donner Pass Rd through Downtown 45 3 Bridge St/Brockway, Donner Pass Rd to Regional Park 43 4 West River St from Brockway to southern Town limit 31 5 Donner Pass Rd from Northwoods Dr to McIver 18 6 Hwy 267 from I-80 to southern Town limit 15 7 Mousehole 12 8 Truckee Legacy Trail 10 9 Ped Bridge 9 10 Brockway Rd from Regional Park to Hwy 267 9 11 Hwy 89S from Donner Pass Road to southern City limit 9 12 Northwoods Blvd from Donner Pass Rd to Tahoe Donner 9 Total 264
Table 2: Top five favorite places to walk or ride a bicycle in Truckee Ranking Segment Description Number of Responses 1 Truckee Legacy Trail 47 2 Donner Lake Rim Trail 28 3 Martis Valley 16 4 Glenshire 14 5 Donner Pass Rd, through town 10 Grand Total 115
April 1, 2014 Workshop and Online Survey
Which bikeway project is most important to you? (Choose up to 4 projects.)
Total Project Votes 1. Class II bike lane on Bridge St/Brockway from Donner Pass Rd to Regional Park 15 2. Class II bike lane on Glenshire Dr and Dorchester Dr 20 3. Class II bike lane on Alder Creek Rd 10 4. Pedestrian bridges over Truckee River 21 5. Railroad crossing between E River St and Railyard 6 6. Truckee Legacy Trail from SR 89 to Donner Memorial State Park 39 7. Class II bike lanes on Donner Pass Rd from Keiser to Hwy 89 2 8. Class II bike lanes on E River St from Bridge St to E River St East end 2 9. Class III bike route on Donner Pass Rd through Downtown 13 10. Truckee Legacy Trail, Phase 4, from Regional Park to SR 89 52 11. Class II bike lane on Hwy 89S from Donner Pass Road to southern City limit 2 12. Class I bike path connecting Truckee River Trail along Martis Dr to Brockway 17 13. Class II bike lane on Hwy 89N from Recreation Center to northern Town limit 6 14. Class II bike lane on Brockway Rd from Regional Park to Hwy 267 4 15. Class I bike path from Downtown to Mogul 23 16. Class II bike lane on Palisades Dr from Brockway Rd to Ponderosa 2 17. Class II bike lane on Martis Valley Rd and Ponderosa Dr 3 18. Class II bike lane on Prosser Dam Rd 6 19. Class I bike path from Comstock to Trout Creek Trail 2 20. Class II bike lane on Joerger Rd and Soaring Way toward Truckee River Trail 5 21. Class I paths through the Coldstream planned development near Donner Memorial State Park 9 22. Class I and II bike path and lane through Hilltop area 3 23. Tahoe Pyramid Bikeway 24 24. Class I bike path from north end of Frates Ln to Donner Pass Road at Levon Ave 6 25. Class I bike path from Olympic Heights to Downtown 6 26. Class I bike path from Glenshire neighborhood to Prosser Area 27 27. Class I bike path from Glenshire Dr to Highland Ave 5 28. Class I bike path from Recreation District to Donner Pass Road parallel to Hwy 267 5 29. Recreational earthen trail from east end of Donner Lake to Donner Summit and From Donner Lake to Tahoe Donner 17 30. Recreational earthen trail from Gateway to Tahoe Donner at Clubhouse 10 31. Recreational earthen trails from Beacon Road extension in Prosser Lake Heights to Emigrant Trail and the east end of Tahoe Donner to Emigrant Trail 6 32. Recreational earthen trail from Hwy 89 at Alder Dr to Forest Service lands/Prosser Reservoir 8 33. Recreational earthen trail connecting Glenshire Dr to existing recreational trails north of Olympic Heights 6 34. Prosser Village Interchange at I-80 to Prosser Reservoir following Station Creek 1 35. Recreational earthen trail from Glenshire Dr at Glenshire Bridge north to Prosser Creek 16
36. Recreational earthen trail connecting Truckee River access to Glenshire neighborhood from Archery View 12 37. Truckee River Trail to Martis Valley following Martis Creek 10
Which walkway project is most important to you? (Choose up to 2 projects.)
Total Project Votes 1. Donner Pass Road through Downtown 46 2. Donner Pass Road from Northwoods to McIver 18 3. W River St 31 4. E River St 9 5. Riverside Dr 4 6. Jiboom St 18 7. Bridge St/Brockway Rd from north end of Bridge St to Palisades Dr 29 8. Martis Valley Rd 9 9. Brockway Rd from roundabouts south toward Hwy 267 11 10. Palisades Dr 4 11. E Main St 0 12. Keiser Ave 0 13. Donner Pass Road from Keiser Ave to I-80 4 14. Cold Stream Rd 5 15. Estates Dr 1 16. Spring St 3 17. Church St and School St 3 18. Donner Trail Rd 5 19. Meadow Way 1
The Town of Truckee will develop a winter maintenance strategy to clear snow from high priority bike paths. At this time, the Town proposes NOT to groom bike paths for Nordic skiing. Do you agree?
73% - Yes 27% - No
If the Town clears snow from high priority bike paths, which is your highest priority?
Truckee River Legacy Trail – 61 votes Pioneer Trail – 11 votes Brockway Road Trail – 11 votes Comstock Trail – 1 vote
APPENDIX D: PROJECT COMMUNITY SUPPORT AND COMMUNITY BENEFIT SCORING
Paved Trails Community Gap Closure Recreational Use Transportation Segment Distance Roadway/Trail Project Limits Project Cost Rating Rating Rating Rating Overall Rating PRIORITY No. (miles) (2-6) (0-3) (0-3) (0-3) Tahoe Donner Trail End of Trout Creek Trail Phase I to Northwoods Blvd. 2 0.7 $ 2,000,000 6 2 3 2 13 High
Truckee River Legacy Trail Phase 5A SR 89 to Coldstream 3 1.5 $ 2,250,000 6 2 3 2 13 High
Truckee River Legacy Trail Phase 5B Coldstream to Donner Memorial State Park 4 0.8 $ 1,250,000 6 2 3 2 13 High
Truckee River Legacy Trail Phase 4 Palisades Dr. to SR 89 (including bridge near SR 89) 5 2.3 $ 4,500,000 6 2 3 2 13 High
Mousehole Project Deerfield Dr./89 South to West River St. 1 0.5 $ 14,000,000 6 2 3 2 13 HIgh
Trout Creek Trail to Lausanne Way/Basel Place End of Trout Creek Trail Phase I to Lausanne Way 6 1 $ 2,000,000 6 2 3 2 13 High
Joerger Dr. at north end of Joerger Ranch to Joerger Joerger Ranch-Riverview Sports Park Connector 7 0.9 $ 1,000,000 4 3 3 2 12 High Ranch/Martis Valley Trail Connector
Pioneer Bike Path Extension Indian Jack Rd. to Frates Ln. 8 1.3 $ 3,250,000 4 2 3 2 11 Medium
Joerger Ranch-Martis Valley Trail Connector South end of Joerger Ranch to south Town limits 9 0.5 $ 750,000 6 0 3 2 11 Medium
Joerger Ranch-Brockway Rd. Connector Western side of Joerger Ranch to Brockway Rd. 10 0.3 $ 750,000 4 2 3 1 10 Medium
Truckee River Legacy Trail to Martis Creek Dam Road to Martis Creek Lake Trail 11 3.4 $ 5,100,000 2 3 2 2 9 Medium Riverview Sports Park
Trout Creek Trail-Pioneer Bike Path Connector Comstock Dr. to Trout Creek Trail 12 0.4 $ 600,000 4 1 3 1 9 Medium
West River St. connecting the Truckee River Legacy Trail and Truckee River Bridge 51 0.1 $ 1,000,000 4 1 3 1 9 Medium West River Street in the vicinity of Riverside Dr.
Overland Trail/Fairway Dr. intersection to Glenshire Dr. Old Greenwood-Glenshire Dr. Bridge Connector 13 1.2 $ 1,800,000 4 1 3 0 8 Medium Truckee River bridge
W. River Railroad Crossing Donner Pass Rd. to West River St. at Spring St. 52 0.1 $ 15,000,000 2 1 0 3 6 Low
Railyards Master Plan Area to East River St. approximately E. River Railroad Crossing 53 0.1 $ 15,000,000 2 1 0 3 6 Low 1,800 feet east of Bridge St.
Railyard Master Plan Shared Use Paths As described in Railyard Master Plan 49 0.9 $ 1,650,000 2 0 3 1 6 Low
Hilltop Master Plan Palisade Dr. at Ponderosa Dr. to Hilltop 14 0.7 $ 1,500,000 2 1 1 0 4 Low Paved Trails
16.7 $73,400,000
Community Rating (2-6) Gap Closure Rating (0-3) Recreational Use Rating (0-3) Transportation Rating (0-3) Legend Low rating=2 Higher points given for trails which connect Points given for trails that Higher points for trails which 2-6=Low id Medium rating=4 or complete existing pedestrian/bike facilities direct access to scenic & reduce vehicle/bike 7-11=Medium High rating=6 resources l conflicts & which connect 12-15=High Constitutes 40% of overall rating neighborhoods to activity Developed with community input centers Implementation Timeline High Priority Projects=Short-term time frame Medium Priority Projects=Mid-term time frame Low Priority Projects=Long-term time frame Paved Trail Priority
Proposed Facilities Boca High Reservoir µ Medium Low Bridge P r o s s e r Railroad Crossing R e s e r v o i r
80 89 ¨¦§
Connection to Tahoe Pyramid Bikeway
Alder Creek Rd ¨¦§80
N o r t ve h ri w D o e o ir d s h s 13 G len Blv d Prosser Dam Rd
AlderDr
6 Donner Lake Glenshire Dr 11 Rim Trail Ski Slope Way 2 12
49 Joerger Dr
Donner Pass 52 53 ¦¨§80 Rd 8 11 Brockway Rd Donner Pass Rd 51 10 7 k e L a 4 3 Waddle Ranch n e r D o n 14 Martis Creek Lake Preserve Trails 1 9
Martis Valley Trail 49 Silverfir Dr Connection 50 5 Palisades Dr 267
0 1 2 Connection to Miles Truckee River Trail 89 Note: Does not include Tahoe Donner Trail System or Golf Course paths
Path: M:\TemplateDevelopment\GIS Skeleton\Maps\Engineering\Working\2015 Trails and Bikeways Master Plan\Paved Trail Priority_2015.mxd 2015 Trails and Bikeways Master Plan
Bike Lanes Community Gap Closure Recreational Use Bike/Vehicle Segment Distance Roadway/Trail Project Limits Project Cost Rating Rating Rating Conflict Rating Overall Rating PRIORITY No. (miles) (2-6) (0-3) (0-3) (0-3) West River Street Riverside Drive to Placer County line 15 1.0 $ 1,500,000 6 3 1 3 13 High
SR 89 Henness Rd. to north Town limits 16 2.4 $ 3,600,000 2 2 2 3 9 High
Donner Pass Road S. Shore Dr. to west Town limits 17 0.6 $ 900,000 2 2 3 1 8 High
SR 89 Donner Pass Rd. to south Town limits 18 0.9 $ 50,000 2 3 0 3 8 High
South River Street Brockway Rd. along South River St. 25 0.1 $ 150,000 2 2 2 2 8 High
Glenshire Dr. 1500' west & 1000' east of Highland Ave. 26 0.5 $ 500,000 2 2 2 2 8 High
Glenshire Dr. & Dorchester Dr. Glenshire Dr./Dorchester Dr. loop 19 3.7 $ 5,550,000 4 2 1 1 8 High
Brockway Rd. Truckee River Regional park to Joerger Ranch 20 0.5 $ 750,000 2 2 1 2 7 Medium
Highway 267 Henness Rd. to south Town limits 21 1.8 $ 50,000 2 2 1 2 7 Medium
McIver Crossing Donner Pass Rd. to West River St. 22 0.1 $ 15,000 2 2 0 2 6 Medium
Alder Creek Rd. & Fjord Rd. Northwoods Blvd. to SR 89 23 4.5 $ 6,750,000 2 1 2 1 6 Medium
Railyard Master Plan Bike Lanes As described in Railyard Master Plan 24 0.8 $ 35,000 2 2 0 2 6 Medium
Palisades Dr./Ponderosa Dr./Martis Brockway Rd./Palisades Dr. intersection to 27 2 $ 3,000,000 2 1 0 1 4 Low Valley Rd. Brockway Rd./Martis Valley Rd. intersection
18.9 $ 22,850,000
Community Rating Gap Closure Rating (0-3) Recreational Use Rating (0-3) Bike/Vehicle Conflict Rating (0-3) Legend Low rating=2 Higher points given for trails which connect Points given for trails that provide Points given for high vehicle volumes & high bike 2-5=Low Medium rating=4 or complete existing pedestrian/bike facilities direct access to scenic & usage 6-7=Medium il High rating=6 resources 8-15=High Constitutes 40% of overall rating Developed from community input Implementation Timeline High Priority Projects=Short-term time frame Medium Priority Projects=Mid-term time frame Low Priority Projects=Long-term time frame
Bike Lane Priority
Proposed Facilities Boca High Reservoir µ Medium Low
P r o s s e r R e s e r v o i r
80 89 ¨¦§
Connection to Tahoe Pyramid Bikeway 23
Alder Creek Rd 16 ¨¦§80 19
N o e r v t ri h D w e o ir o s h d G len s Blv d Prosser Dam Rd
AlderDr
Donner Lake Glenshire Dr 26 Rim Trail Ski Slope Way
21 24 Joerger Dr Donne r Pas §80 s Rd ¦¨ Brockway Rd Donner Pass Rd 22
k e 25 20 17 L a Waddle Ranch n e r D o n Martis Creek Lake Preserve Trails 27 15 Martis Valley Trail 18 Silverfir Dr Connection Palisades Dr 267
0 1 2 Connection to Miles Truckee River Trail 89 Note: Does not include Tahoe Donner Trail System or Golf Course paths
Path: M:\TemplateDevelopment\GIS Skeleton\Maps\Engineering\Working\2015 Trails and Bikeways Master Plan\Bike Lane Priority_2015.mxd 2015 Trails and Bikeways Master Plan
Bike Routes
Segment Community Gap Closure Recreational Use Transportation Roadway/Trail Project Limits Distance (miles) Project Cost Overall Rating PRIORITY No. Rating Rating Rating Rating
Donner Pass Rd. McIver Crossing to Jibboom St. 28 0.7 $ 3,000 2 2 0 2 4 Low Highway Rd. East to Sierra Dr. East, loop Martis Armstrong Tract 29 1.7 $ 8,500 1 2 0 1 3 Low St. Palisade St. & Thomas Dr. Coldstream Road I-80 to end of Cold Stream Rd. 30 0.4 $ 2,000 2 1 1 1 3 Low
Donner Lake Rd. Donner Pass Rd to I-80 interchange 31 1.2 $ 4,500 2 0 1 0 1 Low
4 $ 18,000
Community Rating Gap Closure Rating Recreational Use Rating Transportation Rating Legend Low rating=2 Points given for segments which provide Points given for providing recreational Points given for ease of bicyle 2-5=Low Medium rating=4 important linkages or closures within the bike opportunities transportation 6-10=Medium High rating=6 network 11-15=High Constitutes 40% of overall rating
Implementation Timeline High Priority Projects=Short-term time frame Medium Priority Projects=Mid-term time frame Low Priority Projects=Long-term time frame
Bike Route Priority
Proposed Facilities Boca High Reservoir µ Medium Low
P r o s s e r R e s e r v o i r
80 89 ¨¦§
Connection to Tahoe Pyramid Bikeway
Alder Creek Rd ¨¦§80
N o rt h ve w ri o D o r e d hi s G lens Blv d Prosser Dam Rd
AlderDr
Donner Lake Glenshire Dr Rim Trail Ski Slope Way
Joerger Dr Donne r Pas 28 ¦¨§80 s Rd 29 Brockway Rd 31 Donner Pass Rd
k e L a Waddle Ranch n e r D o n 30 Martis Creek Lake Preserve Trails
Martis Valley Trail Silverfir Dr Connection
Palisades Dr 267
0 1 2 Connection to Miles Truckee River Trail 89 Note: Does not include Tahoe Donner Trail System or Golf Course paths
Path: M:\TemplateDevelopment\GIS Skeleton\Maps\Engineering\Working\2015 Trails and Bikeways Master Plan\Bike Route Priority_2015.mxd 2015 Trails and Bikeways Master Plan
Dirt Trails Community Gap Closure Recreational Transportation Segment Distance Overall Roadway/Trail Project Limits Project Cost Rating Rating Use Rating Rating PRIORITY No. (miles) Rating (2-6) (0-3) (0-3) (0-3) Trout Creek Trail Network All paved segments of Trout Creek Trail 32 2.9 $ 580,000 4 1 3 1 9 Medium
Tahoe-Donner South Trails North of Interstate 80, south of Tahoe-Donner 33 3 $ 600,000 4 1 3 0 8 Medium
Coldstream Specific Plan Trail Coldstream Specific Plan area 34 1.9 $ 380,000 4 1 3 0 8 Medium
Martis Creek Trail Network All paved segments of Martis Creek Trails 35 4.3 $ 860,000 4 1 3 0 8 Medium
Old Greenwood Glenshire Connector Old Greenwood to Glenshire Drive 36 1.2 $ 240,000 2 1 3 1 7 Medium
Bridge Street Gateway Connector Bridge Street to Frates Ln. 37 1.2 $ 260,000 2 1 3 1 7 Medium
Alder Hill Trails East of Tahoe-Donner, north of Trout Creek 38 3.5 $ 700,000 2 0 3 0 5 Low
Glenshire Dr.-Prosser Creek Trail Glenshire Dr. Truckee River bridge to Prosser Creek 39 2.3 $ 460,000 2 0 3 0 5 Low
Old Greenwood to Donner Pass Road at the Town of Old Greenwood -Donner Pass Rd. Connector 40 0.6 $ 120,000 2 0 3 0 5 Low Truckee Public Service Center Glenshire Trails East of Truckee River in Glenshire 41 2.3 $ 460,000 2 0 3 0 5 Low
Eastern Glenshire Trail Glenshire Drive toward eastern Town boundary 42 1.2 $ 240,000 2 0 3 0 5 Low
Northwoods Blvd.-Lausanne Rd. Connector Northwoods Blvd. to Lausanne Rd. 43 0.5 $ 120,000 2 0 3 0 5 Low
State Route 89 N Rainbow Dr. to Alder Creek Rd. 44 0.6 $ 120,000 2 0 3 0 5 Low Hilltop-Truckee River Legacy Trail Hilltop to Truckee River Legacy Trail 45 1 $ 200,000 2 0 3 0 5 Low Connections Prosser Creek Reservoir Trails South of Prosser Creek Reservoir 46 1 $ 200,000 2 0 3 0 5 Low Prosser Village Rd./Interstate 80 interchange to Prosser Village Rd.-Prosser Creek Trail 47 1 $ 200,000 2 0 3 0 5 Low Prosser Creek Donner Pass Road near Donner Lake Road to Billie West End Trail 48 1.1 $ 220,000 2 0 3 0 5 Low Mack Road 26.7 $ 5,960,000
Community Rating Gap Closure Rating (0-3) Recreational Use Rating (0-3) Transportation Rating Legend Low rating=2 Higher points given for trails which connect or Points given for trails that provide Higher points given for trails 2-5=Low Medium rating=4 complete existing pedestrian/bike facilities recreational which reduce vehicle/auto 6-10=Medium High rating=6 Implementation Timeline resources conflicts and which connect 11-15=High Constitutes 40% of overall rating High Priority Projects=Short-term time frame neighborhoods to activity Dirt Trails Developed from community input Medium Priority Projects=Mid-term time frame centers Low Priority Projects=Long-term time frame Dirt Trail Priority
Proposed Facilities Boca High Reservoir µ Medium Low
P r o s s e r R e s e r v o i r
80 89 ¨¦§
Connection to Tahoe Pyramid Bikeway 39 44 Alder Creek Rd 46 ¨¦§80 47
N o rt e h v 41 ri w D o e o r 42 d 36 hi s G lens Blv d Prosser Dam Rd
38
AlderDr
43 32 Donner Lake Glenshire Dr Rim Trail Ski Slope Way 40 32 48 33 Joerger Dr Donne r Pas 37 80 s Rd ¦¨§ Brockway Rd 35 Donner Pass Rd
k e Waddle Ranch L a n e r D o n 45 Martis Creek Lake Preserve Trails 34 Martis Valley Trail Silverfir Dr Connection Palisades Dr 267
0 1 2 Connection to Miles Truckee River Trail 89 Note: Does not include Tahoe Donner Trail System or Golf Course paths
Path: M:\TemplateDevelopment\GIS Skeleton\Maps\Engineering\Working\2015 Trails and Bikeways Master Plan\Dirt Trail Priority_2015.mxd 2015 Trails and Bikeways Master Plan
Sidewalks
Community Gap Closure School Access Pedestrian Distance (LF) - Overall Walkway Segment Project Limits Segment No. Project Cost Rating Rating Rating Safety Rating PRIORITY both sides Rating (2-6) (0-3) (0-3) (0-3)
Donner Pass Rd. Coldstream Rd. to McIver Crossing 54 9,745 $ 682,150 4 3 3 3 13 High Donner Pass Rd. McIver Crossing to East Main St. 55 7,370 $ 515,900 6 3 0 2 11 High W. River St. SR 89 to Bridge St. 56 14,080 $ 985,600 6 1 0 1 8 Medium Jibboom St. Spring St. to Bridge St. 57 1,070 $ 74,900 4 2 0 0 6 Medium E. Keiser Ave. to Palisades Dr. (portions one side 58 2,785 $ 194,950 4 1 0 2 7 Medium Bridge St./Brockway only) Donner Trail Rd. Donner Pass Rd. to Edmunds Dr. (south side only) 59 265 $ 18,550 2 1 2 1 6 Medium Meadow Way Donner Pass Rd. to Rocky Ln. (west side only) 60 1,035 $ 72,450 2 1 2 1 6 Medium Brockway Rd. Martis Valley Rd. to Hope Ct. (south side only) 61 990 $ 69,300 2 2 0 2 6 Medium Martis Valley Rd. Brockway Rd. to Sugar Pine Rd. (south side only) 62 1,190 $ 83,300 2 2 0 1 5 Low Donner Pass Rd. Keiser Ave. to Interstate 80 63 4,475 $ 313,250 2 2 0 1 5 Low Bridge St. to Donner Pass Rd. - includes E. Main St. 64 1,580 $ 110,600 2 2 0 1 5 Low Keiser Ave. (portions only) Brockway Rd. to Crest View Dr. (west/north side 65 940 $ 65,800 2 2 0 1 5 Low Estates Dr. only) Frates Ln. Donner Pass Rd. to Glen Rd. 66 440 $ 30,800 2 1 1 0 4 Low Levone Ave. Donner Pass Rd. to Pine Ave. 67 2,685 $ 187,950 2 1 0 1 4 Low Brockway Rd. along Palisades & Ponderosa to south intersection of Palisade/Ponderosa (west 68 4,880 $ 341,600 2 1 0 1 4 Low Palisades Dr. side only) Spring St. Keiser Ave. to Donner Pass Rd. (west side only) 69 545 $ 38,150 2 1 0 1 4 Low Church St. Bridge St. to Donner Pass Rd. 70 1,010 $ 70,700 2 1 0 1 4 Low School St. Church St. to E. Main St. (west side only) 71 185 $ 12,950 2 1 0 0 3 Low E. River St. Bridge St. to E. River St. east end (north side only) 72 3,250 $ 227,500 2 1 0 0 3 Low
Bridge St. to Truckee Cemetery (north side only) 73 3,740 $ 261,800 2 0 0 0 2 Low Jibboom St. 62,260 $ 4,358,200
Community Rating Gap Closure Rating (0-3) School Access Rating (0-3) Pedestrian Safety Rating (0-3) Legend Low rating=2 Higher points given for trails which connect or Provides access to local schools Higher points for walkways 2-5=Low Medium rating=4 complete existing pedestrian/bike facilities with higher volume of vehicle 6-10=Medium High rating=6 and pedestrian traffic 11-15=High Implementation Timeline High Priority Projects=Short-term time frame Medium Priority Projects=Mid-term time frame Low Priority Projects=Long-term time frame
Sidewalk Priority
¦¨§80 Proposed Facilities High µ Medium Low
Existing Facilities Existing Sidewalk 73 63 Railroad 64 71 267 55 72 57 70 69
60 d. 65 59 ass R 58 65 66 Donner P Brockway Rd
67 56 54 54 54 ¦¨§80 68
61
62
56
Silverfir Dr
Palisades Dr
89
0 0.25 0.5 Miles Note: Does not include Tahoe Donner Trail System or Golf Course paths
Path: M:\TemplateDevelopment\GIS Skeleton\Maps\Engineering\Working\2015 Trails and Bikeways Master Plan\Sidewalk Priority_2015.mxd 2015 Trails and Bikeways Master Plan
APPENDIX E: DESIGN GUIDANCE
APPENDIX E: DESIGN GUIDELINES
INTRODUCTION
The Design Guidelines provide general criteria to be utilized and applied to each specific trail and bikeway project implementing the Master Plan. Realizing that all sites and conditions are unique, the Design Guidelines provide flexibility by providing various methods and techniques for the design of a particular trail or bikeway project proposal. The Design Guidelines purposely utilize “shoulds” in lieu of “shalls” to provide flexibility and promote creativity during the design and planning phases of a project. The spirit of the Design Guidelines should be considered more important than the letter. This is particularly true for recreational trail proposals.
On-street bikeways by their nature must adhere more closely to the letter of the Design Guidelines. The bike lane and route specifications contained within the Design Guidelines have been developed for consistency with state and federal bikeway standards to provide a seamless transition from town- maintained roadways to state-maintained highways and in support of state and federal funding opportunities.
USE & APPLICATION
Use and application of the Design Guidelines will be important for all projects proposing to implement any recreational trail or on-street bikeway segment contained within the Master Plan. The Guidelines are to be used a guide in promoting a unique and interesting system, while at the same time providing a safe, recognizable and uniform system in keeping with Truckee’s mountain character.
The Design Guidelines have been formatted into two distinctly different groups: (i) paved trails and on- street bikeways (known as bike lanes and bike routes) and (ii) dirt recreational trails. Criteria for widths, surfacing types and many other design elements are included within this appendix, utilizing both a numerical and narrative format. Guidelines for disabled access and graphic illustrations are also included within this Appendix to supplement the paved and dirt surface guidelines. All are intended to be used during the planning and design phases of a recreational trail or on-street bikeway project in the community and applied to the final product. Demonstrated consistency with the Design Guidelines will be a primary element of the proposal and evaluation process.
E-1
CLASS I BIKE PATHS & ON-STREET BIKEWAY GUIDELINES
National design standards for bikeways have been developed by the American Association of Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The Caltrans Highway Design Manual, Chapter 1000: Bikeway Planning and Design, serves as the official design standard for all bicycle facilities in California. All designated paved trails and on-street bicycle facilities should conform to these standards, when practical.
Design standards in Chapter 1000 fall into two categories, mandatory and advisory. Caltrans advises that all standards in Chapter 1000 be followed, which also provides a measure of design immunity. Not all possible design options are shown in Chapter 1000. For example, intersections, ramp entrances, rural roads, and a variety of pathway locations are not specified in the Caltrans Highway Design Manual.
Three distinct classifications of paved bikeways are recognized by Caltrans and provided for within the Master Plan. All provide a recreational and alternative transportation purpose to varying degrees. Graphic illustrations of the three types of paved bikeways are including in the Trails & Bikeways Master Plan. The three classifications of bikeways include:
Paved Trail - Variously called a bike path or multi-use trail. Provides for bicycle travel on a paved right-of- way completely separated from any street or highway.
Bike Lane - Provides a striped lane for one-way travel on a street or highway.
Bike Route - Provides for shared use with pedestrian or motor vehicle traffic.
In addition to the Caltrans design standards, the following guidelines should be followed when designing a paved trail:
• Multi-use trails and unpaved facilities that serve a primarily recreational rather than a transportation function and will not be funded with federal transportation dollars may not need to be designed to Caltrans standards.
• Paved trail roadway crossings require preliminary design review. A cross-section is presented on page E-22. Generally speaking, bike paths that cross roadways with an average daily traffic (ADT) of over 20,000 vehicles will require either signalization, roundabout or grade separation.
• Landscaping should not be water intensive and consist of native vegetation.
• Barriers at pathway entrances should be clearly marked with reflectors and should be ADA accessible (min. 5 feet clearance).
E-2
• Bike path construction should take into account impacts of maintenance and emergency vehicles on shoulders and vertical requirements.
• Two-foot-wide unpaved shoulders for pedestrians/runners or a separate tread-way should be provided where feasible.
• Provide adequate trailhead parking and other facilities such as restrooms and drinking fountains at appropriate locations.
TABLE E.1 - PAVED TRAIL SPECIFICATIONS
Specification Material Dimension
Recycled Asphalt 3” (75 mm)
Pavement Type: Asphalt ¹ 3” (75 mm)
Concrete ² 3” (75 mm)
Granite 6” (100-150 mm) Sub-Base: Gravel 6” (100-150 mm)
Shoulders: 2-4” (50-100 mm)
Minimum 2-way Path 8’ (2.4 m) Width: Preferred 2-way Path 10-12’ (3.0-3.6 m)
Shoulders: 2-3’ (0.6-1.0 m)
Lateral Clearance: 2-3’ (0.6-1.0 m)
Vertical Clearance: 8-10’ (2.5-3.0 m)
Centerline (none, dashed yellow, solid 4” (100 mm) Striping: yellow)
Edgeline (none or solid white) 4” (100 mm)
Signing: (See Caltrans Traffic Manual and MUTCD)
Minimum Cross Slope: 2% 2%
Minimum Separation from 5’ (1.5 m) Roadway: ²
20-30 Design Speed: (40-50 kph) mph
Maximum Super Elevation: 5% 5%
E-3
TABLE E.1 - PAVED TRAIL SPECIFICATIONS
Specification Material Dimension
Maximum Grades (over 100’): 5% 5%
Removable Bollards (minimum 5’ (1.5 m) spacing):
Lighting (if night use is 5-22 LUX 5-22 LUX expected):
¹ Asphalt may be unsuitable for paved trails in stream channels due to asphalt oils. Concrete paving is recommended in areas where the trail is subject to regular water flow. ² ³ Unless physical barrier is provided.
TABLE E.2 - BIKE LANE SPECIFICATIONS
Minimum Widths1 Preferred: 5’ (1.5m)
Minimum: 4’ (1.2m)
Striping Left side line: solid white stripe 6” (150mm)
Right side line: solid white stripe 4” (100mm)
Approach to intersections dashed white 100-200’ (30m-60m) stripe
Signing R81 Bike Lane Sign beginning of all bike lanes far side of all bike path crossings at approaches and far side of all arterial crossings at major changes in direction maximum ½ mile (0.8km) intervals
Custom Bike Route Sign with G33 Directional Arrow and destination signs (where needed) see items under R81 Bike Lane Sign at approach to arterial crossings
No parking as necessary
E-4
TABLE E.2 - BIKE LANE SPECIFICATIONS
Pavement Markings “Bike” legend “Lane” legend Directional arrow See items under R81 Bike Lane Sign At beginning and end of bike lane pockets at approach to intersection
Source: Caltrans Highway Design Manual, Chapter 1000, MUTCD, Caltrans Traffic Manual ¹ Measured between stripe and edge of pavement
Bike lanes should also follow the following guidelines:
• Bike lane pockets (min. 4’ wide) between right turn lanes and through lanes should be provided wherever available width allows, and right turn volumes exceed 150 motor vehicles/hour.
• Although not completely unavoidable or inappropriate for all situations (i.e., South Shore Drive, south side of Donner Lake), bike lane transitions into bike routes should be discouraged. Alternatives to a bike lane to bike route transition should be analyzed, including a reroute of the bike lane or entire designation as a bike route.
BIKE ROUTE STANDARDS
Bike routes are designated as preferred routes for bicyclists. These routes provide continuity to other bicycle facilities such as bike lanes or paved trails. They provide a common route for bicyclists through high demand corridors and are preferable on low vehicle traffic volume roadways. Typically located on local neighborhood streets, they provide linkages to high use destinations such as schools, parks and commercial centers.
TABLE E.3 - CLASS III BIKE ROUTE SPECIFICATIONS
Recommended Placement Purpose Amenity/Activity
Bike Route Signs/Directional Start and end points, route Provide clear route signs changes, intersections definition
Adjust to give greater Safety and efficiency Stop Signs, Signals priority to bicyclists of route
Adjust utility covers, fill All existing locations Provide a smooth and
E-5
potholes, install bike safe safe route drainage grates
Where roadway width is Removal of street parking Improve safety restricted
Increased Curb Lane Width 12’ minimum, 14’ optimum Improve safety
Remove debris that Regular street sweepings are hazardous
ADDITIONAL FACILITIES
In addition to those identified by Caltrans, there are a variety of improvements that will enhance the safety and attractiveness of streets for bicyclists. All should be considered in the bikeway planning process and implemented when feasible to promote the safest environment for bicyclists.
Sidewalks
The use of sidewalks as bicycle facilities is not encouraged by Caltrans, even as a bike route. There are, however, exceptions to this rule. The California Vehicle Code states: “Local authorities may adopt rules and regulations by ordinance or resolution regarding the…operation of bicycles…on the public sidewalks” (CA VC 21100, Subdiv. H). Caltrans adds in Chapter 1000: “In residential areas, sidewalk riding by young children too inexperienced to ride in the street is common. With lower bicycle speeds and lower auto speeds, potential conflicts are somewhat lessened, but still exist. But it is inappropriate to sign these facilities as bikeways. Bicyclists should not be encouraged (through signing) to ride facilities that are not designed to accommodate bicycle travel.” When constructed, the preferred minimum width for sidewalks is six feet. The required minimum for ADA accessibility is four feet.
Traffic Calming
This includes any effort to moderate or reduce vehicle speeds and/or volumes on streets where that traffic has a negative impact on bicycle or pedestrian movement. Because these efforts may impact traffic outside the immediate corridor, study of traffic impacts is typically required. Other techniques include installing traffic circles, intersection islands, partial street closings, ‘bulb-out’ curbs, pavement treatments, lower speed signal timing, and narrowing travel lanes. Traffic circles, roundabouts, and other measures may be considered for residential collector streets where there is a desire to control travel speeds and traffic volumes but not to install numerous stop signs or traffic signals.
E-6
Signing and Striping
All bikeway signing should conform to the signing identified in the Caltrans Traffic Manual and/or the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). These documents give specific information on the type and location of signing for the primary bike system. A list of bikeway signs from Caltrans and the MUTCD are shown in Table E.4.
Develop a Truckee Bikeway System logo for use on the primary network. This sign may include a bikeway numbering system that is keyed into a publicly-produced bikeway map. Installing bikeway signs should be a high priority, and may begin immediately on bike route portions of the bikeway network.
Locations in downtown and other employment areas where centralized public covered bicycle parking can be installed, such as parking lots, should be identified. These facilities may charge a small user fee and/or be subsidized by nearby employers.
TABLE E.4 - RECOMMENDED SIGNING & MARKING
Caltrans MUTCD Item Location Color Designation Designation
No Motor Vehicles Entrances to trail B on W R44A R5-3
Use Ped Signal/Yield to Peds At crosswalks; where sidewalks B on W R9-5 are being used R9-6
Bike Lane Ahead: Right Lane Bikes At beginning of bike lanes B on W R3-16 Only R3-17
STOP, YIELD At trail intersections with roads W on R R1-2 R1-1 and Coastal Bikeways R1-2
Bicycle Crossing For motorists at trail crossings B on Y W79 W11-1
Bike Lane At the far side of all arterial B on W R81 D11-1 intersections
Hazardous Condition Slippery or rough pavement B on Y W42 W8-10
Turns and Curves At turns and curves which B on Y W1,2,3 W1-1,2 exceed 20 mph design W4,5,6,14 W1-4,5 specifications W56,57 W1-6
Trail Intersections At trail intersections where no B on Y W7,8,9 W2-1, W2-2 STOP or YIELD required, or W2-3, W2-3 sight lines limited W2-4, W2-5
E-7
TABLE E.4 - RECOMMENDED SIGNING & MARKING
Caltrans MUTCD Item Location Color Designation Designation
STOP Ahead Where STOP sign is obscured B,R on Y W17 W3-1
Signal Ahead Where signal is obscured B,R,G YW41 W3-3
Bikeway Narrows Where bikeway width narrows B on Y W15 W5-4 or is below 8’
Downgrade Where sustained bikeway B on Y W29 W7-5 gradient is above 5%
Pedestrian Crossing Where pedestrian walkway B on Y W54 W11A-2 crosses trail
Restricted Vertical Clearance Where vertical clearance is less B on Y W47 W11A-2 than 8’6”
Railroad Crossing Where trail crosses railway B on Y W47 W10-1 tracks at grade
Directional Signs (i.e. Downtown, At intersections where access to W on G G7 D1-1b(r/l) Train Station, etc. major destinations is available G8 D1-1c
Right Lane Must Turn Right; Begin Where bike lanes end before B on W R18 R3-7 Right Turn Here, Yield to Bikes intersection R4-4
Truckee Bikeway Trail logo: at all trail entrances, Varies major intersections, major access points
Trail Regulations All trail entrances B on W
Multi-purpose Trail: Bikes Yield to All trail entrances Pedestrians
Bikes Reduce Speed & Call Out Every 2,000 feet B on W Before Passing
Please Stay On Trail In environmentally-sensitive areas
Caution: Storm Damaged Trail Storm damaged locations B on Y
Trail Closed: No Entry Until Made Where trail or access points Accessible & Safe for Public Use closed due to hazardous
E-8
TABLE E.4 - RECOMMENDED SIGNING & MARKING
Caltrans MUTCD Item Location Color Designation Designation
conditions
Speed Limit Signs Near trail entrances: where B on W speed limits should be reduced from 20 mph
Trail Curfew 10PM - 5AM Based on local ordinance R on W
DIRT TRAIL GUIDELINES
This section sets forth design and maintenance recommendations for the dirt recreational trails within the planned system. These recommendations reflect current thinking with respect to the functioning of low- impact multiple-use dirt trails. The dirt trail design recommendations are geared towards providing a high quality trail system that provides trail users with a high quality recreational experience. Proposed recommendations seek to meet the anticipated needs of a wide variety of trail users.
Because trails are bare dirt surfaces, erosion from rainfall, runoff, and trail use can produce significant amounts of sediments. Thus, potential trail impacts on local water quality should be considered. Trails can also impact groundwater, wetlands, wildlife, vegetation, community layout, scenic values and land uses. Because of these considerations, the design recommendations and maintenance program for the dirt trail system should aim to fulfill the following goals:
• Provide workable facilities for multiple users
• Preserve scenic resources
• Protect water quality, wetlands, floodplains and streams
• Protect sensitive areas, including designated wildlife habitats and plant communities
• Protect historic resources
• Control erosion and protect exposed soil areas
DEFINE LEVELS OF CHALLENGE FOR DIRT TRAILS
Because the needs of trail users vary, trail specifications can be combined in different ways to develop level-of challenge categories for multiple use trails in the trail network. By grouping the trails into three
E-9
broad levels, decisions can be made about such issues as whether to provide abundant trail amenities, how wide to make bridge crossings, and other considerations.
Level I trails, the easiest category of multi-use trails, would be wide, low-gradient trails with large turning radii, few obstructions, and opportunities for half- and full-day excursions and/or loops of five miles or less. Such trails would accommodate the widest variety of uses and are also prime candidates for winter grooming. Level II trail users would expect to find moderate gradients, possibilities for longer excursions and more rugged tread surfaces. Level III trails would have steeper overall gradients and pitches, narrower and more primitive tread surfaces and possibly longer routes.
TABLE E.5 - TRAIL CHARACTERISTICS BY LEVEL OF CHALLENGE
Level I - Easiest Level II - Moderate Level III - Difficult
Many trail amenities Moderate grades Sections with steep grades
High level of maintenance 10’ vertical clearance Low numbers of people present
Signage indicating destinations Moderate numbers of people Signage indicating major within ½-1 mile present destinations, 3-5 mile distances
Info kiosks on route Good connectivity and signage to Narrow treads main trails
Close ties with trail heads and Narrow treads, 18” wide Non-groomed ski trails restroom facilities
Links to major destinations and Signage indicating major commercial areas destinations within 2-4 mile distances
Limited sections of moderate grades
High numbers of people present
12’ vertical clearance
Trail treads – 24” wide
Trail blazes always in sight
E-10
DIRT TRAIL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
Dirt trail design considerations include: gradient, overall elevation gain, sight distance, overhead and right-of-way clearing, radii for switchbacks and climbing turns, and tread width and conditions. Trails for different user groups may require specific design solutions and the people in the various user groups will have certain expectations about the location of amenities and the level of difficulty desired on an outing. Key user groups are: hikers, mountain bikers and equestrians.
Table E.6 can be used to develop trail recommendations to meet the varying levels of public expectation on the trail system.
TABLE E.6 - TRAIL LEVELS & RECOMMENDATIONS
Criteria User Group Easiest Moderate Difficult
Gradient Hikers 10% for 100’ 15% for 300’ Up to 30% for 500’
Mountain 10% maximum 10% maximum Sustained grades or Bikers sustained pitch for sustained pitch for pitches greater than 100’ 300’ 10%
Equestrians 15% for 200’ 25% for 300’ 30% for 500’
Switchback Hikers 2-4’ and Turn radii
Mountain 6’ minimum for 3’ For speeds of 5-15 2’ Bikers climbing turn: 10’ mph: 55’
Equestrians 5’
Cleared Tread, Hikers 18”-24”, obstacle 12”-18”, roots, 12”, tread is not Surface free embedded rocks and graded some logs may be left.
Mountain 24”, smooth 12”-24”, some rough 12”, varied- some Bikers sections. portage required.
Equestrians 24”, with cleared 24”, roots and 18”, surface not surface, reinforced embedded rocks and graded. At precipices, cross drains and logs not removed. trail base should be puncheon or minimum 48”-60” turnpike in bog wide. Extra trail width sections. needed in steep terrain.
E-11
TABLE E.6 - TRAIL LEVELS & RECOMMENDATIONS
Criteria User Group Easiest Moderate Difficult
Overhead Hikers 8’ 8’ 8’ Clearing
Mountain 8’ 8’ 8’ Bikers
Equestrians 10’ 8’ 8’
Right-of-Way Hikers 4’ 3’-4’ 3’ Clearing
Mountain 4’ 3’-4’ 3’ Bikers
Equestrians 8’ (for pack 6’ (clearance as for 3’ – 4’ wide clearance between easiest trail) large trees, there must be 3’ on either side of the trail center line 30” above the trail surface)
SIGHT DISTANCE
When sight distance is limited, pullouts should be provided that can accommodate all types of trail users. For mountain bicyclists it is important to provide sufficient sight distance for stopping at 15 mph on straightaways and 5 mph on blind curves and switchbacks.
TREAD PREPARATION OR SUPPORT
It is recommended that wet areas be avoided when deciding on the location of any type of trail. If it’s not possible to avoid a wet area, foundation rock should be used as a tread preparation. Under-drainage should be provided for water crossing trails that are also used during snow conditions.
When preparing the tread of a trail for hikers, gravel can be used in wet spots. For mountain bike trails, avoid using cobbles and other large materials and use elongated drain dips over water bars.
E-12
WATER CROSSINGS
Some recommendations for water crossings on hiking, biking or equestrian trails include:
Hiking: If not on a bridge, the tread (rocks or logs) across water or wet areas should be a minimum of 12” wide, 24” apart.
Mountain Biking: Ramps should be provided up to a bridge structure so cyclists do not have to dismount. Approaches to bridges should be straight.
PROTECT WATER QUALITY, WETLANDS, FLOODPLAINS AND STREAMS
Dirt trails have the capacity to change the timing, quantity and quality of runoff by “short-circuiting” the natural hydrologic system and delivering both sediments and water directly to streams, wetlands and riparian resources. For this reason, care should be taken to minimize the impacts of trails on these resources. Practices to achieve this protection include:
Avoid wet areas. Trails should avoid wet areas, springs, floodplains, stream corridors, wetlands, and the lower portions of slopes, especially those that are north-facing.
Identify and map water resources within 200 feet of the trail system. Accurately locating wetlands, streams and riparian areas relative to the trail is an important element of the trail planning. The location of these potential “receiving resources” for trail drainage and associated sediments will affect decisions about placement of trail drainage structures, maneuvering of maintenance equipment, season of work, interception and infiltration of trail drainage, and disposal of earth materials generated during maintenance activities.
Minimize crossings of streams and wetlands. Minimize channel crossings and changes to natural drainage patterns.
Minimize trail drainage to streams and wetlands. Minimize the hydrologic connectivity of trails with streams, wetlands and other water resources.
Keep heavy equipment off wet trails. Avoid operating heavy equipment on trails when they are wet. Use alternate routes for heavy equipment when trails are wet.
Provide crossing structures where needed. Where trails traverse wet areas, structures should be provided to avoid trail widening and damage at “go-around” spots. Crossing structures also help protect water quality, wetlands and riparian areas.
E-13
Establish vegetative buffers between trails, streams and wetlands. Retain a buffer between trails and water resources by establishing riparian and streamside management zones (RSMZs), within which trail influences such as drainage, disturbance and trail width are minimized.
The following practices are important in preventing or minimizing the impacts of trails in wet meadows:
• Groundwater and surface drainage should not be intercepted, diverted or concentrated by in- meadow ditches, interception ditches, berms or fill embankments;
• Meadows should not be used for borrow materials;
• Upland roads should not drain directly to wet meadows;
• Culverts should not be below grade;
• Incision should not be occurring below the meadow surface;
• Discharge of human-influenced drainage should be by level spreading;
• Maintenance of existing ditches should only be carried out when needed and should not result in ditch deepening or sediment transport to wet meadow;
• Existing ditches should have frequent turnouts and plugs;
• Under-drains should have drop inlets and these should not be undercut;
• Outlet scour pools should not be present of enlarging;
• Headcuts should not be present;
• Upland species should not be invading;
• Meadow should provide base flows to downstream channel during dry season.
PROTECT SENSITIVE AREAS, INCLUDING DESIGNATED WILDLIFE HABITATS AND PLANT COMMUNITIES
In today’s regulatory environment, resource-disturbing activities on federal lands such as construction of new trail alignments are subject to the requirements of federal ecosystem and watershed planning as well as the Clean Water and Endangered Species acts. For this reason, decisions made during trail master planning that concern trail alignment, realignment, decommissioning and some kinds of maintenance will be subject to environmental impact analysis. A few over-arching principles can provide some guidelines for master planning, and hopefully, steer many project elements away from the lengthy and expensive environmental assessment process.
E-14
Avoid new construction in late successional forest stands. Minimize disturbances in late successional reserve stands of timber, which are characterized by older trees, often with closed canopy, and where certain flora and fauna are of concern for protection.
Utilize disturbed areas. Utilize existing disturbed areas and clearings for trails and parking facilities, to the extent that such use does not detract from the area’s scenic quality.
Establish vegetative buffers for non-conforming uses. Industrial and commercial uses adjacent to trails should be screened by means of fully planted native vegetative buffers at least 25 feet wide.
Establish riparian and streamside management setbacks (RSMS). Vegetative disturbances such as thinning, pruning and felling to improve canopy openings should be allowed as necessary to maintain existing trails in RSMSs. However, no heavy equipment should operate outside the trail clearing limits here. Stormwater discharges from roads and trails to the RSMS should be minimized to the maximum extent possible. Stormwater discharges that cannot be avoided should be designed for maximum treatment, sedimentation, infiltration and level-spreading before entering the RSMS.
Avoid wet areas unless special construction techniques are used.
On federal lands, make certain to coordinate with the U.S. Forest Service. Numerous plant and animal species are protected on federal lands. Where disturbances for construction or maintenance of the trail system will occur on federal lands, it will be essential to coordinate with the U.S. Forest Service to assure that species inventory and protection protocols are followed.
PROTECT HISTORIC RESOURCES
Leave artifacts and document their location.
Remove non-historic items. Remove trash and object foreign to the historic character of the resource.
Prevent uses that degrade the historic routes.
CONTROL EROSION AND PROTECT EXPOSED SOIL AREAS
Dirt trails must be sloped so that their surfaces shed water and the materials supporting the tread remain structurally sound. Favorable drainage gradients are achieved in numerous ways, including cross-sloping (in-sloping, out-sloping, or crowning) and by means of rolling dips and water bars. It is essential to limit both slope length and gradient of road runoff to control erosion. The following drainage practices are
E-15
commonly prescribed and are essential to the long-term stability of dirt trails and protection of the resources where runoff is directed:
• Avoid steep trail grades. Avoid steep trail grades in excess of 12 percent. It is very difficult to control drainage on steep grades, and erosion on steep grades is expensive to remediate.
• Maintain minimum drainage gradients. Maintain positive surface drainage by means of out- sloped, in-sloped, or crowned sections having cross slopes of 3 percent to 5 percent. The road surface should be graded to shed water before it can run very far down the road.
• Maintain minimum tread width for uses specified. Maintain only the width of tread necessary to support the designated uses. Maintaining excess width can be expensive and can generate unnecessary and chronic erosion. Often, excess width can be successfully ripped and seeded to reduce the amount of bare dirt surface exposed to erosion.
• Provide drainage at frequencies appropriate for soils and gradients. Roll grades or undulate the road profile frequently to disperse water from the tread. Rolling dips and water bars provide essential drainage relief frequency that prevents erosion from damaging the dirt surface of the trail. Spacing depends on gradient and the erodibility of the native earth materials. Table E.7 summarizes drainage relief frequencies for low standard (non-surfaced) roads, and can be used as a starting place for determining the necessary spacing of drainage features on trails.
TABLE E.7 - ROLLING DIP/WATER BAR SPACING IN DIFFERENT MATERIALS
Trail Grade Trail Materials
Coarse, rocky gravelly Gravelly sands, silty Silty clays, clays, fine Friable silts, fine silts materials sandy gravels, coarse sandy silty clay, and sands, fine pyroclastics weathered decomposed granite metavolcanics soils
2-4 % 280-300 ft. 145-160 ft. 121-136 ft. 85-100 ft.
6-8% 230-250 ft. 135-140 ft. 106-113 ft. 70-75 ft.
10-12% 175-200 ft. 115-125 ft. 80-97 ft. 50-60 ft.
Source: Geotechnical/Materials Engineering Training Session, by Keller and Vanderhust, U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Region V., 1982 Notes: Spacing given is to avoid rilling in excess of one inch. In middle topographic position, reduce spacing 18 feet. In lower topographic position, reduce spacing 35 feet. On SW aspects, reduce spacing 15 feet. For each 10 percent decrease in slope steepness below 80 percent, reduce spacing 5 feet.
• Assure that drainage facilities do not pose barriers to bicyclists. Rolling grade dips must be “transparent” to a bike wheel--that is, elongated, so that riders roll smoothly through them--and must be angled at 45 degrees or so to the travel direction. They must fall at about 20 percent of
E-16
slope so that they are “self-cleaning,” meaning that downslope-moving sediments delivered to them will be carried off the road in runoff. The mound and dip must be armored with gravel or rock.
• Prevent erosion at outlets of rolling dips and culverts. Drainage outlets should be armored with rock to prevent erosion. Brush or native organic debris can be spread in lead-off ditches to slow the velocity of the runoff and facilitate the deposition of sediments. Even well-functioning rolling dips require maintenance.
• Install pipes and ditches as a last resort; assure funds are available to maintain them. Road and trail under-drains (culverts) and associated ditches should be used only as a last resort to achieve good drainage. This is because these facilities require regular inspection and maintenance, and severe damage can result from their failure. See Table E.7 for recommendations about culvert spacing.
TABLE E.8 - RECOMMENDED DISTANCE BETWEEN CULVERT CROSS- DRAINS (IN FEET)
Trail Grade (%) Soils with Low to Moderate Soils with High Erosion Erosion Hazard Hazard
0-3 500 325
4-6 400 230
7-9 325 160
10-12 280 130
12+ 245 100
Source: Low Volume Road Engineering Best Management Practices Field Guide Keller and Sherar, USFS. Jan. 2001.
• Avoid long sustained grades. Avoid long, sustained grades that concentrate flows. Install grade breaks to get stormwater off the trail and to allow trail users a rest.
• Avoid discharging trail runoff onto fill slopes and unprotected soils. Concentrated runoff from trails can cause damage to fill slopes and to unprotected soils adjacent to the trail. Discharge sites need to be carefully selected so that runoff velocity is slowed and sediments settle out. Fill slopes should be armored where runoff is discharged onto them, or the runoff should be conveyed in a down drain to a location where sediments can be deposited and the flow infiltrated.
• Do not let watercourses run down the trail. Descend to a water crossing from both sides of the channel so that stream flow cannot run down the road or trail.
E-17
• Avoid floodplain stream crossings. Cross streams at narrow spots where there is enough root support for bridge footings, the span will be out of reach of flood waters and the trail will not be subject to floodplain dynamics.
• Select pipe sizes based on hydrologic data. All culvert sizes should be prescribed based on the size of the contributing watershed and best hydrologic data available. If data are not available and the size of the contributing sub-watershed is 20 acres or less, add the number of acres in the sub- watershed to 8, then round up to the nearest even inch to estimate the culvert size.
• Avoid maintenance activities that generate sediments. To prevent the generation of sediments from runoff, only road surfaces that need to be reshaped should be bladed and only ditches that are plugged with sediments should be cleaned.
• Season of work. Maintenance work that results in disturbed earth should be delayed until after the wet season. Blading should be done when the trail surface materials are moist, but not dry.
• Experienced contractors. Maintenance activities should be carried out by experienced contractors who have had input into the maintenance contracts, attended a pre-work site meeting, have had training, and are familiar with practices to protect the local water resources.
• Disposal of excess earth materials. Areas for disposal of excess earth materials generated during maintenance activities should be designated in the maintenance plan.
• Management of spoils piles. Excess earth materials that must be stored on slopes, or where runoff from them can reach wetlands, riparian areas, streams or other sensitive resources, should be surrounded covered with plastic or a thick layer of wood chips.
• Stabilize disturbed earth. Areas of disturbed earth should be seeded with native plant materials and mulched as soon as possible after disturbance.
DISABLED ACCESS GUIDELINES
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities. As a general rule, it is desirable to maximize accessibility along any public trail system. Specific standards have been developed for buildings and efforts are being made to develop standards for trails. However, it is recognized that constructing trails outdoors may have limitations that make meeting ADA standards difficult and sometimes prohibitive. Prohibitive impacts include harm to significant cultural or natural resources, a significant change in the intended purpose of the trail, requirements of construction methods that are against federal, state or local regulations, or presence of terrain characteristics that prevent compliance. See Table E.9 which provides guidelines for development of accessible trails.
Simple details to be considered in the planning and design process can greatly enhance accessibility to and within the planned system. Breaks in long grades, consideration of the user’s eye level, minimizing
E-18
grades at drainage crossings, providing areas to get off the trail, and appropriately designed seating walls are examples of simple accessible improvements. Consultation with the physically challenged on specific design issues prior to the planning and design of trails or trailhead facilities can be very beneficial and is encouraged for every accessible project. Details to ensure a barrier free, safe and enjoyable project for the physically challenged can best be provided by a physically challenged individual(s).
TABLE E.9 - ADA TRAIL DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES
Item Recommended Treatment Purpose
Trail Surface Hard surface such as, asphalt, Provide a smooth surface that concrete, wood, compacted gravel accommodates wheelchairs
Trail Gradient1 Maximum of 5% Greater than 5% is too strenuous
Trail Cross Slope 2% maximum Provide positive trail drainage, but avoid excessive gravitational to side of trail
Trail Width 5’ Minimum Accommodate a wide variety of users
Trail Amenities, Place no higher than 4’ off ground Provide access within reach of phones, drinking wheelchair users fountains, ped. Actuated buttons
Detectable Place at top of ramp before entering Provide visual cues for visually impaired pavement changes roadways at curb ramp approaches
Trailhead Signage Accessibility information such as trail User convenience and safety gradient/profile, distances, tread conditions, location of drinking fountains and rest stops
Parking Provide at least one accessible parking User convenience and safety area at each trailhead
Rest Areas On trails specifically designated as User convenience and safety accessible, provide rest areas/widened areas on the trail optimally at every 300’
1 In some cases, steeper grades may be allowed for short distances so long as appropriate resting places are provided.
E-19
ILLUSTRATED DESIGN GUIDELINES
A number of illustrations with accompanying text descriptions have been included within the Plan to graphically detail the design intent for specific situations and physical conditions. The illustrated design guidelines are intended to supplement the text design guidelines contained within this Appendix and to be provided the same flexibility in their interpretation and application. The illustrated design guidelines provide additional general guidance for the design and planning process by providing illustrated concepts or schematics, not construction specifications. The construction details for each individual trail project must be custom tailored based upon the specific needs of each project and environmental conditions.
LIST OF FIGURES – APPENDIX E, DESIGN GUIDELINES
E.1 – Paved Trail, Bike Lane & Bike Route E.16 – Infiltration Classifications
E.2 – Paved Trail E.17 – Gabion & Geo-Web
E.3 – Paved Trail E.18 – Trail Adjacent to Environmentally Sensitive Area
E.4 – At-Grade Crossing E.19 – Major Crossing of Stream or Drainage
E.5 – Regulatory & Safety Bikeway Signs E.20 – Bridge
E.6 – Bike Lane with Narrow Travel Lane E.21 – Boardwalk
E.7 – Trail Adjacent to Street E.22 – Culverts
E.8 – Trail Parallel to Roadway E.23 – Log Water Bar
E.9 – Trail in Relation to Street, Residence E.24 – Fences & Stream
E.10 – Trail Adjacent to Development E.25 – Bicycle Racks
E.11 – Trail Concept Through Clustered E.26 – Informational Signage Subdivision
E.12 – Trail Adjacent to Railroad E.27 – Information Kiosk
E.13 – Creek Trail on Slope E.28 – Interpretive Sign
E.14 – Trail Side-Slope Treatments E.29 – Trailhead without Parking
E-20
E.15 – Tread Construction, Stabilization & E.30 – Trailhead with Parking Area Steps
E.1 GENERAL BIKEWAY CLASSIFICATIONS
Three basic classes of on-street bikeways are contained within the Plan and routinely used throughout the state as the basis for bikeway planning and design. Unlike the off-street recreational trail guidelines contained within the Plan, these three classes of on-street bikeways and the guidelines and standards for each established by the California Department of Transportation are afforded much less flexibility. Consistency with the state-established guidelines and standards is necessary to provide safe bicycling opportunities and cohesive connections with adjoining bikeway networks.
Paved Trail
Bike Lane
Bike Route
E-21
E.2 PAVED TRAIL
Pavement width may vary dependent upon the type and intensity of traffic anticipated, provided a minimum 8’ paved section is constructed for dedicated Class I facilities.
E.3 SHARED CLASS I BIKE PATH
A Class I bike path with a separated dirt trail creates the best opportunity for the most types of users. A 4- 6’ width is appropriate and necessary for equestrian use. A 2’ wide dirt trail is adequate to accommodate walkers and joggers. In either case, a 2’ separation should be provided to minimize user conflicts and keep any loose material from entering the paved surface. Tighter turns, shorter sightlines, more grade changes and a less linear alignment are all encouraged for the dirt trail to provide a more interesting experience.
E-22
8-12 ft
E.4 AT-GRADE TRAIL CROSSING
Although to be avoided when feasible, roadway crossings will be necessary for some planned segments. Use of existing roadway crossings are encouraged at controlled road intersections in lieu of new crossings and the associated need for new crossing control improvements. Low volume/speed crossings are preferred. Consideration for adequate sight-lines and vehicular stopping distances is important. Trail crossings of private driveways require particular attention to user safety, requiring either caution or yield (either trail user to driveway user or vice-versa) signs and/or cautionary pavement striping.
E.5 REGULATORY & SAFETY BIKEWAY SIGNS
Regulatory signs inform bicyclists, pedestrians, equestrians and motorists of laws or regulations which are not always obviously apparent to the user. Safety signs provide warning or caution of a possible hazardous condition, like the ‘caution: downhill’ bicycle sign show at right. They should be erected at the point of their applicability (50’ prior for a hazard warning), clearly indicate the requirement and be easily visible and legible. They should be conservatively used to avoid excess signage and the resultant loss of effectiveness. Uniformity in size, height, location, design and colors throughout the system is essential to convey a clear, simple message to all users. All signs should be reflectorized and sized appropriately based upon the type of message for the intended user(s). The California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices provides current signage standards.
E-23
E.6 BIKE LANE WITH NARROW TRAVEL LANE
Narrow travel lanes aid in reducing traffic speeds and can more efficiently utilize existing pavement area. They will most commonly be applied in residential neighborhoods and low-traffic commercial areas. In either case, a minimum 4’ wide bike lane should be maintained and striped / signed consistent with Table E.4 within Appendix E, Design Guidelines.
5 ft 5 ft
E-24
E.7 TRAIL ADJACENT TO STREET
Portions of some trail segments will necessarily be located directly adjacent to roadways due to steep slopes, waterways or other physical/ environmental constraints. These expanded sidewalk trails should consider both pedestrian and bicycle traffic and safety, utilizing a separate on-street bike lane/route when feasible to accommodate bicycle use. If a separate bike lane/route is not available, the trail must be of sufficient width to prevent conflicts between bicyclists and pedestrians. In this situation, a one-way bicycle lane/route should be striped/signed on the opposite side of the street to promote one-way bicycle use of the sidewalk (with two-way pedestrian traffic).
E.8 TRAIL PARALLELING ROADWAY
The type and width of separation (from the roadway) provided for trails paralleling roadways will vary dependent upon site-specific conditions. High traffic volume roadways will warrant a greater separation than slower speed, low-use roadways. A separated trail (in lieu of that adjacent to the roadway shown in Figure 8.8) protects users from roadway snow removal. Native vegetation and existing features (rock outcroppings, rolling topography) should be used whenever possible and supplemented by additional landscape screening and buffering to promote a more enjoyable and safer user experience.
E-25
E.9 TRAIL IN RELATION TO STREET, RESIDENCE & STREAM
Existing natural and man-made features should be used as a buffer between trails and private property. Where possible locate trails adjacent to the front yards streets and / or public open spaces rather than adjacent to private back yards.
E-26
E.10 TRAIL ADJACENT TO DEVELOPMENT
New trail segments located adjacent or in close proximity to existing developed property (particularly residential) should utilize grade separations, landscaping and / or fencing to help buffer and screen the trail corridor from existing development, to minimize the possibility of trespass onto private property and to ensure the maintenance of privacy and security.
E.11 TRAIL CONCEPT THROUGH CLUSTERED SUBDIVISION
When designing the trail system, consider the alignment of a primary through-trail with secondary spur trails providing access to individual development clusters. Multiple connections from each individual residential unit with the primary / main trail should be discouraged through a well-designed and easily accessible spur trail(s). Open space areas created with clustered development provide the best opportunity for linear recreational opportunities such as bike paths and recreational trails.
E-27
E.12 TRAIL ADJACENT TO RAILROAD
Trails in close proximity to railroads require close coordination with the Union Pacific Railroad and no pre- established standards apply. Rather, trails are designed on a case-by-case basis, based on existing constraints such as topography, environmental resources, existing rights-of-way and other factors.
E.13 CREEK TRAIL ON SLOPE
Locating the trail on the top of the creek bank is the preferred location when possible. When trail segments adjacent to waterways must be located on a slope, the less steep the better. Steep slopes should be avoided. Slope cuts should be minimized and existing vegetation preserved to the extent possible by utilizing the natural topography of the site without creating large undulations in the trail surface/grade/profile. Guardrails should only be installed when warranted due to safety concerns.
E-28
E.14 TRAIL SIDE-SLOPE TREATMENTS
Topographic conditions should be carefully considered to maximize protection of the trail, minimize supporting trail structures (ie: retention devices) and protect the surrounding environment. Trail surfaces should be constructed to sheet flow from the inside to the outside of the trail (ie: outslope) without creating concentrated flows on the down side of the trail. Crowning can be utilized for steep trails. Side swales and berms can also be used to prevent water from reaching the trail surface and provide a lower place on the trail to drain. An inside swale is only necessary when concentrated or heavy flows may wash onto the trail. Grade breaks, considering the existing natural topography and utilizing the natural topography, creating low points in longer stretches of trail on grades can prevent washouts.
E-29
E.15 TREAD CONSTRUCTION, STABILIZATION & STEPS
The stabilization of cuts / fills created with new trail construction is necessary to prevent erosion, protect water quality and to maintain the trail surface. Use of existing vegetation and revegetation to supplement edge stabilization and retention devices will aid in preventing erosion and create a more natural trail corridor. Revegetation with native species (unless temporary irrigation is provided) will be necessary for steep disturbed slopes. Slope stabilization materials can consist of wood, rock or indigenous or natural materials designed to blend with the natural surroundings. Vertical retention devices should only be used when necessary. Railroad tie (or other suitable natural material such as stone) steps can be used for short, steep grades. Shared use trails should utilize a larger tread versus a reduced 8” tread for pedestrian trails. Wooden stairs should be constructed of pressure treated or an approved rot resistant timber.
E-30
E.16 INFILTRATION
Careful consideration of water runoff and treatment in the trail design and construction process is crucial to prevent impacts to water quality and to protect the stability of the trail surface and edges. Infiltration trenches for impermeable trail surfaces (shown in figure) can be used on a single (side slope) side or both (crowned) sides of a trail dependent upon the design and construction utilized for a particular trail segment. Trenches can be used in conjunction with or supplemented by catch basins located on lower sections of a trail segment.
E-31
E.17 GABION TRAIL CONCEPT & GEO WEB
Rock-filled wire gabion construction should be used when more-natural rock rip-rap or other retention treatment is not feasible due to physical conditions or where native rock is too small or too round for stacking. They can be stacked into walls or laid into revetment. They are low cost, easily constructed, compatible with aquatic environments and habitat, require little foundation preparation and are permeable to water.
E-32
E.18 TRAIL ADJACENT TO ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA
Wetlands, floodplains and other environmentally sensitive areas should be avoided if at all feasible and provided some degree of separation from the trail. When feasible, a minimum of 50’ from the edge of the floodplain is recommended for optimum protection. Existing vegetated areas are preferred to create the most natural and compatible buffer. Fences or other physical barriers should only be used to protect a particularly sensitive environmental resource.
E-33
E.19 MAJOR CROSSING OF STREAM OR DRAINAGE
Bridges (in lieu of culverts or boardwalks) should be used to cross natural or man-made continual running water, areas of riparian or wildlife value or when they provide a user interest and enjoyment. They must be designed for each individual situation and be solid, sturdy and grounded. Due to their association and proximity to water, only galvanized hardware, bolts with washers and pressure treated lumber should be used. Handrails being the exception, requiring a smooth finish. The design should be pleasing to users and compatible with the surrounding environs. Abutments should be located as high on the walls of the channel as possible to decrease their visibility and minimize obstruction of the channel. Bridges should span the entire 100-year floodway.
E-34
E.20 BRIDGES
Bridge surfacing can vary dependent upon anticipated user needs (equestrians, bicyclists). Natural materials and finishes are encouraged to best complement and blend with the surrounding environment. Tread width and surfacing may vary dependent upon user(s) needs, particularly for equestrian use and / or disabled access necessitating wider widths and better traction surfacing. A recycle rubber surface can be used when heavy equestrian use is anticipated.
Example of Bridge Design
E.21 BOARDWALK CONCEPT SECTIONAL VIEW
Natural materials should be used to be compatible with the sensitive environment commonly associated with the use of boardwalks. Railing should be used only when necessary to prevent trespass onto sensitive or unsafe areas, otherwise a 4”x4” curb will suffice. Railings should be smooth. Stepping stones can also be used for low-traffic, pedestrian only trails to cross stable areas in short stretches, typically no longer than 25’.
E-35
Example of Boardwalk Concept
E.22 TRAIL CULVERTS
Drainage crossings should be carefully designed to avoid the destructive effects upon the trail of concentrated water flows. Culverts should be adequately sized to accommodate projected water volumes and include native stone rock rip-rap headwalls / outfalls to protect the edges of the trail and downhill land area. Under certain conditions an unimproved swale crossing (very low flows), concrete swale (w/in built environment), stone paving (naturally rocky area, low use) and channelization (occasionally wet areas) can be used in lieu of culverts. These treatments should only be used for pedestrian trails and carefully consider the impact upon the surrounding wetland ecology.
E-36
E.23 LOG WATER BAR
Rolling dips can be used in lieu of log water bars, particularly when mountain bicycle use is anticipated as they divert water off of the trail with minimal affect on trail users. In both cases, installation must carefully consider the cross slope of the trail and topography of the surrounding area. Rubber water bars can also be used for high volume multiple use trails. See also the spacing specifications contained in Table E.6.
E-37
E.24 FENCE TYPES
Fences should be used sparingly throughout the system and only when providing a specific benefit to adjoining private or environmentally sensitive lands. A segment-by-segment fence analysis should accompany each project proposal. Fence design should directly relate to its intended function. Fences should be supplemented with existing and / or new native landscaping. Small fence sections can be used to prevent short-cutting or draw a user to a specific focal point. A low-lying single rail fence can be used as a reminder for users to stay on the established trail. Long stretches of fencing should be avoided to prevent narrow corridors and, where possible, be located on only one side of the trail. Fences should be no closer than 5’ to the trail edge and a minimum width of 20’ provided when fences are on both sides of the trail.
E-38
E.25 BICYCLE RACKS
A wide variety of bicycle parking devices are available and acceptable. Bicycle racks should be designed to adequately support and secure bicycles, be a minimum of 5’ in width (each) and be paved. Racks should be located in easily accessible and safe locations in close proximity to the entrances of both commercial and residential developments. A physical separation or barrier should be placed between bicycle parking
E-39
facilities and automobile parking areas. An enclosed bicycle locker system can also be used for outside longer-term bicycle parking.
E.26 INFORMATIONAL SIGNS
These signs are intended to be used both as trailhead markers and internally throughout the system. When used as a trailhead marker (in lieu of an information kiosk), the sign should be constructed to a 5’-8’ height (dependent upon visibility) with either single or double supporting wood posts. Signs should be
E-40
constructed of painted metal with a wood backing and finished with a consistent font, background color and contrasting border color. Small signs should be 18”x24”, large signs 30”x42” (exterior dimensions, excluding logo).
Smaller ‘bollard type’ information signs should be used within the system to provide distance, direction and user information. They can also be used for small trailheads in lieu of either the post mounted or kiosk signs. The 3” square information symbols provided within each of the two bollard type signs (12” and 6” square shown) should be constructed of either carsonite or metal, recessed ½” deep and epoxyed into place.
E.27 INFORMATION KIOSK
Kiosks should be placed at major trailhead locations (ie: those with parking) and occasionally throughout the system to provides educational opportunities. They should be designed and constructed with natural materials and colors to best complement the surrounding environment. Height and mass should be minimized to that necessary to adequate convey the intended message or information.
E-41
E.28 INTERPRETIVE SIGN
Signs educating trail users about environmental resources or historic place / events should be used often throughout the system. Interpretive signs should be placed in close proximity to the area of the message being conveyed, maintain an aesthetic backdrop and be anchored to the site with vertical elements such as larger trees or rocks.
E-42
E.29 TRAILHEAD WITHOUT PARKING
Trailheads without parking delineate an entrance into the trail network within areas of nearby public parking or within residential subdivisions where parking areas are not necessary or would be incompatible with the surrounding neighborhood. A user information area should be provided for any informational signs or other supporting facilities, backed with native vegetation, rocks and fencing if necessary.
E-43
E.30 TRAILHEADS WITH PARKING AREA
Parking areas should be visible from the adjoining roadway, but not a dominating or degrading aesthetic feature. Sites should be chosen based upon their ability to accommodate a parking area considering its size, topography, environmental sensitivity and proximity to surrounding land uses. Parking layout should be organized in a logical and space-saving manner, varying in design from a simple roadside parking area to a one-way looped parking area with diagonal parking dependent upon the anticipated demand. Consideration for equestrian use, including trailer parking and maneuvering, should be made when designing trailhead parking areas for trail segments accommodating equestrian use. Graveled or paved parking areas provide superior snow removal and lessen impact to air quality and should be used in lieu of a dirt surface for larger parking areas.
E-44
E-45
APPENDIX F: ON-STREET BIKEWAY PROPOSAL AND EVALUATION PROCESS This page intentionally left blank.
APPENDIX F: ON-STREET BIKEWAY PROPOSAL & EVALUATION PROCESS
Most on-street bikeway projects, with the exception of Caltrans initiated projects on state highways, will be initiated by the Town of Truckee. The town staff is responsible for implementing the on-street bikeway proposal and evaluation process, involving a varying degree of public notification and environmental review dependent upon the scope of the proposed on-street bikeway project.
Many on-street bikeway projects will entail only striping and/or signing of the existing roadway, a scope of work not subject to the review requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and provided public notification and review as a component of the Master Plan public hearings, workshops and advertisements. Simple signing and/or striping of the existing roadway to implement the Class II and Class III bikeway contained within the Master Plan will involve no additional formal public notification.
Implementation of other Class II and Class III bikeways will necessitate road widening, intersection improvements or drainage improvements warranting specific formal public notification and CEQA review. An analysis of the potential environmental impacts associated with the specific on-street bikeway project will be conducted by the town staff and, if not exempt from CEQA, the appropriate environmental document prepared, noticed and circulated. The Town Council will be the decision body to approve, disapprove or modify the project and make the final environmental determination. For projects involving widening, street improvements or private property impacts, construction notice to all property owners adjacent to the project roadway will be provided by door hangers and/or informational signage prior to the start of construction.
For all on-street bikeway projects, the Town is committed to following a ‘good neighbor’ policy. On-street bikeway projects involving physical impact to private property owner improvements will be personally contacted by the town staff as these impacts are identified in the field. This contact is not only intended to provide notice to property owners of upcoming roadway improvements, but also to open dialogue with property owners about reasonably available solutions to limit impacts upon existing improvements. The need for additional public notification will always be considered for every on-street bikeway project on a case-by-case basis by the town staff.
F-1
This page intentionally left blank. APPENDIX G: TOWN COUNCIL RESOLUTION This page intentionally left blank.